{"id":62149,"date":"2026-07-18T15:23:36","date_gmt":"2026-07-18T09:53:36","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/dcit-v-drs-logistics-p-ltd-2025-132-itr-67hydtrib\/"},"modified":"2026-07-18T15:23:36","modified_gmt":"2026-07-18T09:53:36","slug":"dcit-v-drs-logistics-p-ltd-2025-132-itr-67hydtrib","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/dcit-v-drs-logistics-p-ltd-2025-132-itr-67hydtrib\/","title":{"rendered":"DCIT v. DRS Logistics P. Ltd. (2025) 132 ITR 67(Hyd)(Trib.)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p class=\"font-claude-response-body\" style=\"margin: 0in;margin-bottom: .0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height: 150%\"><span lang=\"EN-IN\" style=\"font-family: &#039;Verdana&#039;,sans-serif\">The assessee&#8217;s assessment was completed under section 143(3) after scrutiny, wherein all details including purchase and sale of land documents and the tax audit report were furnished. Within four years, the AO reopened the assessment merely for verification of the computation of total income and a loss on sale of assets already disclosed, without any fresh material. The CIT(A) held the reopening invalid, being mere reverification without evidence of escapement of income. On appeal, the Tribunal held that reopening cannot be resorted to for the purpose of thorough verification, and there must be tangible material in the form of fresh evidence before initiating such a step; since the entire material on the basis of which reasons were recorded was already available in the assessment record and no new material showed escapement of income, the reassessment proceedings were not sustainable in law. (AY.2008-09)<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S. 147: Reassessment-Condition precedent-Tangible material to reopen assessment-Assessing Officer seeking to verify computation of total income-No new material to show escapement of income-Reassessment not sustainable. [S. 143(3), 148]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-62149","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-gap","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/62149","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=62149"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/62149\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":62150,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/62149\/revisions\/62150"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=62149"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=62149"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=62149"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}