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 :

        2014 (2) TMI 1125 - HC - 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

        Validity of assessment reopening notice upheld based on income escapement belief. Importance of valid reasons stressed. The Court upheld the validity of the notice issued under Section 148 read with Section 147 for reopening the assessment for the Assessment Year 2006-07 ...
                      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.

                          Validity of assessment reopening notice upheld based on income escapement belief. Importance of valid reasons stressed.

                          The Court upheld the validity of the notice issued under Section 148 read with Section 147 for reopening the assessment for the Assessment Year 2006-07 based on information received regarding accommodation entries provided by bogus companies. It emphasized the necessity of establishing a valid reason to believe income escapement for lawful reopening of assessments under Section 147, ultimately dismissing the petition without costs awarded.




                          Issues:
                          Reopening of assessment under Section 147 based on information received, Failure to disclose fully and truly all necessary facts, Justification for reopening assessment after a search conducted, Interpretation of "reason to believe" under Section 147(1), Assessment of credit worthiness and genuineness of transaction, Compliance with proviso to Section 147(1) for reopening assessment beyond four years.

                          Reopening of Assessment under Section 147:
                          The judgment pertains to a petition challenging a notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for reopening the assessment for the Assessment Year 2006-07 under Section 147. The reasons for reopening the assessment were based on information received regarding accommodation entries provided by bogus companies. The petitioner challenged the reopening, arguing that there was no failure to disclose necessary facts and that the reopening beyond four years was contrary to law.

                          Failure to Disclose Fully and Truly:
                          The petitioner contended that there was no failure to disclose all relevant facts during the initial assessment under Section 143(3). The petitioner had provided information, including details about the alleged bogus companies, during the assessment proceedings. However, the revenue argued that mere disclosure of transaction details does not establish genuineness, and the Assessing Officer did not adequately assess the credit worthiness of the companies involved.

                          Justification for Reopening after Search Conducted:
                          The petitioner questioned the justification for reopening the assessment more than four years after a search was conducted on the office of the Chartered Accountant involved in creating bogus companies. The revenue argued that the basis for reopening was the information gathered during the investigation, indicating a reason to believe that income had escaped assessment.

                          Interpretation of "Reason to Believe" under Section 147(1):
                          The Court analyzed the meaning of "reason to believe" as per legal precedents, emphasizing that the Assessing Officer must have a cause or justification to suspect income escapement, not conclusive proof. The reopening of assessment under Section 147(1) requires a valid reason to believe that income has escaped assessment.

                          Assessment of Credit Worthiness and Genuineness of Transaction:
                          The Court highlighted the importance of assessing three aspects - identity of investors, credit worthiness of applicants, and genuineness of the transaction. It noted that the initial assessment order did not demonstrate a thorough evaluation of these aspects, especially regarding the credit worthiness of the companies involved in the transactions.

                          Compliance with Proviso to Section 147(1) for Reopening Assessment Beyond Four Years:
                          The judgment clarified that although the reopening of assessment was beyond four years, the Assessing Officer was satisfied that the conditions stipulated in the proviso to Section 147(1) were fulfilled. The Court emphasized that the observations made were solely for determining the validity of the notice reopening the assessment, leaving the factual determinations for the assessment proceedings.

                          Conclusion:
                          Ultimately, the Court found no illegality in the Assessing Officer's order or the notice issued under Section 148 read with Section 147, leading to the dismissal of the petition with no costs awarded. The judgment underscores the significance of establishing a valid reason to believe income escapement for the lawful reopening of assessments under Section 147.
                          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