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

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2021 (2) TMI 900 - 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

        Invalid Assessment Reopening under Section 147: Lack of Reasonable Belief The Tribunal held that the reopening of assessments under Section 147 of the Income-tax Act for the years in question was invalid. The Assessing Officer ...
                        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.

                            Invalid Assessment Reopening under Section 147: Lack of Reasonable Belief

                            The Tribunal held that the reopening of assessments under Section 147 of the Income-tax Act for the years in question was invalid. The Assessing Officer lacked a valid "reason to believe" that income had escaped assessment, as the reopening was based on a mere change of opinion without tangible new material. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of objective reasoning and consistency in accounting practices, quashing the tax authorities' orders and allowing the assessee's appeals without delving into the merits of the case.




                            Issues Involved:
                            1. Validity of reopening the assessment under Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
                            2. Assessment of un-reconciled gold stock.
                            3. Consistency in accounting practices of the assessee.

                            Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

                            1. Validity of Reopening the Assessment under Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961:
                            The assessee challenged the reopening of assessments for the years 2006-07 to 2012-13. The primary legal issue was whether the Assessing Officer (AO) had valid "reason to believe" that income had escaped assessment, which is a prerequisite for invoking Section 147. The Tribunal noted that the AO had not alleged any specific escapement of income but merely formed an opinion that the un-reconciled gold stock of 17.319 kgs should be brought to tax. The Tribunal emphasized that "reason to believe" must have a rational connection and cannot be a mere change of opinion. The AO's acceptance of the gold belonging to family members negated the notion of it being un-reconciled stock. The Tribunal concluded that the reopening was based on a change of opinion and lacked tangible material, rendering it invalid.

                            2. Assessment of Un-reconciled Gold Stock:
                            During a survey operation on 25.09.2012, the AO found excess gold stock termed as "un-reconciled gold." The assessee explained that 17.319 kgs of gold belonged to family members and customers, taken as metal loans and not included in the book stock. The AO, however, believed this gold should be accounted for in the assessee's books and that capital gains should have been declared by the family members. The Tribunal found that the AO's view was subjective and not supported by any new tangible material. The Tribunal highlighted that the AO's reasoning did not establish any escapement of income but was merely an opinion on how the gold should be accounted for, which is insufficient for reopening assessments.

                            3. Consistency in Accounting Practices of the Assessee:
                            The Tribunal observed that the assessee had consistently followed the same accounting practice for many years, including the method of recording gold received from family members as metal loans. This practice had been accepted by the AO in previous assessments, including a survey conducted in 2001. The Tribunal noted that the AO was aware of these practices and had allowed deductions for user fees paid to family members for the gold. The Tribunal concluded that the AO had no reason to doubt the genuineness of the assessee's explanations regarding the gold stock, and the reopening of assessments was unwarranted.

                            Conclusion:
                            The Tribunal held that the reopening of assessments for the years under consideration was invalid as it was based on a mere change of opinion without any new tangible material. The orders passed by the tax authorities were quashed, and the appeals of the assessee were allowed. The Tribunal did not adjudicate the grounds on merits since the reopening itself was deemed invalid. The decision emphasized the importance of objective reasoning and consistency in accounting practices in tax assessments.
                            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