RABBIT BUILDERS,KARAIKAL vs. ACIT, THANJAVUR

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri V. Durga Raoआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.1377, 1378 & 1379/Mds/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2004-05, 2005-06 & 2007-2008)

191 ITR 662(SC), for initiation of action under Section 147(a) (as the provision stood at the relevant time) fulfillment of the two requisite conditions in that regard is essential. At that stage, the final outcome of the proceeding is not relevant. In other words, at the initiation stage, what is required is 'reason to believe

RABBIT BUILDERS,KARAIKAL vs. ACIT, THANJAVUR

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri V. Durga Raoआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.1377, 1378 & 1379/Mds/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2004-05, 2005-06 & 2007-2008)

191 ITR 662(SC), for initiation of action under Section 147(a) (as the provision stood at the relevant time) fulfillment of the two requisite conditions in that regard is essential. At that stage, the final outcome of the proceeding is not relevant. In other words, at the initiation stage, what is required is 'reason to believe

RABBIT BUILDERS,KARAIKAL vs. ACIT, THANJAVUR

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri V. Durga Raoआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.1377, 1378 & 1379/Mds/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2004-05, 2005-06 & 2007-2008)

191 ITR 662(SC), for initiation of action under Section 147(a) (as the provision stood at the relevant time) fulfillment of the two requisite conditions in that regard is essential. At that stage, the final outcome of the proceeding is not relevant. In other words, at the initiation stage, what is required is 'reason to believe

D.A.V. EDUCATIONAL TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD-4,, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1667, 1668, 1669 & 1670/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 D.A.V. Educational Trust, 5, S V Illam, Mohanapuri Lake View Street, Adambakkam, Chennai 600 088. [Pan: Aaatc5967A] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से / Appellant By Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward 4, Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Shri G. Baskar, Advocate & Shri A. Satyaseelan, Advocate Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit 28.10.2025 21.01.2026 : प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By : सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : आदेश/Order Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders All Dated 05.04.2024 Passed By The Id. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The

reassessment. 9. The Id. DR Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT submits that the argument of reopening of assessment, barred by limitation, is untenable. She submits that the first proviso to section 147 of the Act allows reopening of assessment beyond 4 years if the income has escaped assessment due to assessee's failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts

S.DEVENDRAN,TRICHY vs. ITO, TRICHY

In the result, the appeals of the assessees for all the

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George]

Section 147 authorises and permits the Assessing Officer to assess or reassess income chargeable to tax if he has reason to believe that income for any assessment year has escaped assessment. The word "reason" in the phrase "reason to believe" would mean cause or justification. If the Assessing Officer has cause or justification to know or suppose that income

S.DEVENDRAN,TRICHY vs. ITO, TRICHY

In the result, the appeals of the assessees for all the

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George]

Section 147 authorises and permits the Assessing Officer to assess or reassess income chargeable to tax if he has reason to believe that income for any assessment year has escaped assessment. The word "reason" in the phrase "reason to believe" would mean cause or justification. If the Assessing Officer has cause or justification to know or suppose that income

M.R.PRASAD,TRICHY vs. ITO, TRICHY

In the result, the appeals of the assessees for all the

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George]

Section 147 authorises and permits the Assessing Officer to assess or reassess income chargeable to tax if he has reason to believe that income for any assessment year has escaped assessment. The word "reason" in the phrase "reason to believe" would mean cause or justification. If the Assessing Officer has cause or justification to know or suppose that income

PRAKASH,TRICHY vs. ITO, TRICHY

In the result, the appeals of the assessees for all the

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George]

Section 147 authorises and permits the Assessing Officer to assess or reassess income chargeable to tax if he has reason to believe that income for any assessment year has escaped assessment. The word "reason" in the phrase "reason to believe" would mean cause or justification. If the Assessing Officer has cause or justification to know or suppose that income

M.R.PRASAD,TRICHY vs. ITO, TRICHY

In the result, the appeals of the assessees for all the

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George]

Section 147 authorises and permits the Assessing Officer to assess or reassess income chargeable to tax if he has reason to believe that income for any assessment year has escaped assessment. The word "reason" in the phrase "reason to believe" would mean cause or justification. If the Assessing Officer has cause or justification to know or suppose that income

PRAKASH,TRICHY vs. ITO, TRICHY

In the result, the appeals of the assessees for all the

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George]

Section 147 authorises and permits the Assessing Officer to assess or reassess income chargeable to tax if he has reason to believe that income for any assessment year has escaped assessment. The word "reason" in the phrase "reason to believe" would mean cause or justification. If the Assessing Officer has cause or justification to know or suppose that income

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. S & P FOUNDATIONS PVT LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, Cross-objection of the assessee No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 1883/Mds/2014 & C.O.No.93/Mds/2014 (In Ita No.1883/Mds/2014) ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-2006)

191 ITR662(SC), for initiation of action under Section 147(a) (as the provision stood at the relevant time) fulfillment of the two requisite conditions in that regard is essential. At that stage, the final outcome of the proceeding is not relevant. In other words, at the initiation stage, what is required is 'reason to believe', but not the established

SANTECH SOLUTONS PVT LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as 9

Bench: Shri Abraham P.George & Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1036/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2008-2009

191, the apex court clearly held that once the primary facts are before the assessing authority he requires no further assistance by way of disclosure. It was observed by the apex court that (page 201) : “It is for him to decide what inferences of facts can be reasonably drawn and what legal inferences have ultimately to be drawn

CHENNIAPPAN RAMADURAI,ERODE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, COIMBATORE

In the result the appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1337/Chny/2023 & Ita Nos.1340/Chny/2023 निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2018-19 & Ay-2019-20 Shri Chenniappan Ramadurai, Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, No.56, Nms Compound, Erode, Central Circle-2, Coimbatore. Tamil Nadu-638001. [Pan: Aelpr2706M] & Ita Nos.1343/Chny/2023 For Ay 2019-20 Smt. Ramadurai Amutha, No.56, Nms Compound, Erode, Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Tamil Nadu-638001. Central Circle-2, Coimbatore. [Pan: Afvpa4816L] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.S.Sridhar, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Shri Arv Srinivasan, Addl.Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30.05.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12.06.2024

191/- being 200% of the tax payable as mandated u/s 270A(8). 6.0 Before the Ld.CIT(A) the assessee pleaded that the penalty was not leviable on various accounts, inter-alia, including the fact that non- processing of returned filed u/s148 was not processed u/s 148(1), addition made by the AO on estimate basis, applicability of provisions of section

EMPEE HOLDINGS LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ramit Kochar

Section 147 authorises and permits the Assessing Officer to assess or reassess income chargeable to tax if he has reason to believe that income for any assessment :- 17 -: year has escaped assessment. The word "reason" in the phrase "reason to believe" would mean cause or justification. If the Assessing Officer has cause or justification to know or suppose that income

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. CHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENT AND FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Ble

191 (SC) - The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Uttar Pradesh v. Aryaverth Chawl Udyog [(2015) 53 taxmann.com 66] No ‘reason to believe’ that income has escaped assessment – Mere • change of opinion not a valid basis for reassessment Wherein it was held that mere a change on opinion cannot be held as a valid reason

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. M/S CHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENT & FINANCE COMPANY LTD, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Ble

191 (SC) - The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Uttar Pradesh v. Aryaverth Chawl Udyog [(2015) 53 taxmann.com 66] No ‘reason to believe’ that income has escaped assessment – Mere • change of opinion not a valid basis for reassessment Wherein it was held that mere a change on opinion cannot be held as a valid reason

K.R.JAYARAM,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

reassessment under which the Assessing Officer was empowered to reopen the assessment on the basis of "definite information". Though this judgment is based on the phraseology of section 34 of the 1922 Act as it existed before 1948 which did not contain the expression "reason to believe", that principle was adopted by the Supreme Court while dealing with section

HYUNDAI MOTOR INDIA LIMITED,KANCHEEPURAM vs. DCIT LTU-II, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

reassessment proceedings for the A.Y.2008-09. The appeal is dismissed.” Aggrieved assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 7. We have heard rival contentions and gone through facts and circumstances of the case. Before us, the ld.AR for the assessee argued and took us through the reasons recorded by the AO for reopening of assessment, which are enclosed in assessee

P. NALLUSAMY,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

reassess such income and also any other income chargeable to tax ncome and also any other income chargeable to tax ncome and also any other income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment and which comes to his notice which has escaped assessment and which comes to his notice which has escaped assessment and which comes to his notice subsequently