Notice under section 148 issued to a dead person could not be continued against the legal representatives and moreover, section 292B also could not be resorted to.
Since the cash deposit made by assessee was from the business activities of glass bangle trading business, therefore, no addition under section 69 over and above the returned income would be warranted.
otice under section 148 issued on the basis of insufficient compliance to Letters dated 20.05.2011 and dated 02.02.2016 were wholly unauthorized in law as the reasons recorded must indicate that AO had applied his mind to the fact that income was chargeable to tax under the Act and it had exceeded maximum amount not chargeable to income Tax. Hence, reassessment was not valid as there were no reasons recorded by AO in the eye of law for assuming jurisdiction in this case.
Proceedings under section 148 could not be initiated for verification of the sources of investment and therefore, the reasons recorded by AO were no reasons in the eye of law for assuming jurisdiction for issuing notice under section 148.
Notice under section 148 could not be issued for verification of information, but here the jurisdictional satisfaction of the essential requirement had to be shown that there had to be reason to believe that there was income chargeable to tax which was not there in the assessment order passed. Thus, the reasons recorded by AO were no reasons in the eye of law for assuming jurisdiction and the assessment orders u/s 144 read with 147 was quashed.
Where no notice under section 148 is issued or if the notice so issued is shown to be invalid, or the service of notice so issued, is shown to be invalid, AO could not proceed with the subsequent proceedings for making assessment, reassessment or re-computation under section 147. Unless, the notice was served on the proper person in the manner prescribed under section 282, the service was insufficient and AO did not have jurisdiction to re-assess the escaped income.
In ITR Form-2 and ITR Form-3, in Part-A General, at column (h), the taxpayer is required to state whether he was Director in a company at any time during the previous year. In case of an affirmative answer, the taxpayer is further required to disclose following information relating to each company in which he was a Director:-
The last date for furnishing of Annual Return in the FORM GSTR-9 / FORM GSTR-9A and Reconciliation Statement in FORM GSTR-9C for the financial year 2017-18 has been extended from 31st August, 2019 to 30th November, 2019. RoD Order No. 07/2019-CT dtd. 26.08.2019. Last date for Annual Returns- Last Date for filing of Annual returns […]
Today, investment planning is as important as earning. And why is that? In a volatile world like this, you never know what’s coming next for you. There might be an unexpected expense or rise in inflation, and all of this can create a financial imbalance in your life. The way you can deal with all […]
The due date of filing GST Annual Return in Form GSTR-9/9A & Reconciliation Statement in Form GSTR-9C is 31.08.2019. The utility of the Annual Return is such that taxpayers are facing difficulties in furnishing information particularly inward HSN summary, reconciliation of ITC with GSTR-2A and its matching with ITC populated in table 8A of GSTR-9. […]
