Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2013 (4) TMI 863 - AT - Income Tax

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Tribunal partially allows assessee's appeal, invalidating reassessment by Assessing Officer. Genuineness of purchases not addressed. The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee in part, holding that the initiation of reassessment proceedings by the Assessing Officer (AO) was not ...
                      Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                          Tribunal partially allows assessee's appeal, invalidating reassessment by Assessing Officer. Genuineness of purchases not addressed.

                          The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee in part, holding that the initiation of reassessment proceedings by the Assessing Officer (AO) was not valid and the assessment order was quashed. The Tribunal did not adjudicate on the issue of the genuineness of the alleged bogus purchases due to the invalidity of the reassessment proceedings.




                          Issues Involved:
                          1. Validity of reopening the assessment under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
                          2. Alleged failure of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment.
                          3. Alleged bogus purchases amounting to Rs. 3,11,25,000/-.

                          Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

                          1. Validity of Reopening the Assessment under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961:
                          The assessee contended that the reopening of the assessment after more than five years from the end of the assessment year 2003-04 was invalid as there was no failure on their part to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment. The reopening was based on the statement of a third party, Shri Mukesh Choksi, who admitted to providing bogus bills and share capital entries through various companies, including Talent Infoway Ltd. The Tribunal noted that the original assessment was completed under Section 143(3) of the Act, and all necessary details were provided by the assessee during the original assessment. The Tribunal further observed that the statement of Shri Mukesh Choksi did not specifically mention the assessee or the transactions in question. The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer (AO) initiated reassessment proceedings based on suspicion and without any specific material evidence linking the assessee to the alleged bogus transactions. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the initiation of reassessment proceedings was not valid and was barred by limitation as per the proviso to Section 147 of the Income Tax Act.

                          2. Alleged Failure of the Assessee to Disclose Fully and Truly All Material Facts Necessary for Assessment:
                          The Tribunal observed that during the original assessment, the assessee had provided all necessary details regarding purchases and sales, including party-wise details, addresses, and other relevant information. The AO had verified these details before completing the assessment under Section 143(3). The Tribunal referred to the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of ITO vs. Lakhmani Mewal Das, which stated that the duty of the assessee is to make a true and full disclosure of primary facts. The Tribunal held that the assessee had fulfilled this duty, and the AO's belief that income had escaped assessment due to the assessee's failure to disclose material facts was not justified. The Tribunal emphasized that there must be a direct nexus between the material before the AO and the belief of escapement of income, which was missing in this case.

                          3. Alleged Bogus Purchases Amounting to Rs. 3,11,25,000/-:
                          The AO had made an addition of Rs. 3,11,25,000/- to the assessee's income on account of alleged bogus purchases from Talent Infoway Ltd., based on the statement of Shri Mukesh Choksi. However, the Tribunal noted that the statement did not specifically mention the assessee or the transactions in question. The Tribunal also considered the invoices and other documents provided by the assessee, which indicated that the purchases were genuine. Since the Tribunal held that the initiation of reassessment proceedings was not valid, it did not find it necessary to adjudicate on the issue of the genuineness of the purchases.

                          Conclusion:
                          The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee in part, holding that the initiation of reassessment proceedings by the AO was not valid and the assessment order was quashed. The Tribunal did not adjudicate on the issue of the genuineness of the purchases due to the invalidity of the reassessment proceedings. The appeal was pronounced in the open court on 17th April, 2013.
                          Full Summary is available for active users!
                          Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                          Topics

                          ActsIncome Tax
                          No Records Found