"Experienced professional with over 3 years of Post qualification experience in handling Assessments, dealing CIT(A) and ITAT Appeals."
The tribunal held that reassessment initiated through a jurisdictional officer instead of the mandatory faceless mechanism was invalid. Notices under Section 148 issued after 01.04.2021 must follow the faceless scheme, failing which the entire assessment collapses.
The tribunal held that dismissal for non-prosecution was invalid where notices were not served on the email ID specified in Form 35. Authorities must strictly follow the communication mode chosen by the taxpayer, failing which proceedings are vitiated.
The High Court held that a reassessment notice issued without a manual or digital signature violates Section 282A of the Income-tax Act. Such an unsigned notice is invalid in law, rendering all consequential proceedings unsustainable.
The Tribunal held that delayed responses to statutory notices do not attract penalty when full compliance is ultimately made and accepted before assessment completion. The key takeaway is that penalties cannot be imposed mechanically in the absence of willful default.
Tribunal held that cash found and seized cannot be treated as unexplained when it is fully reflected in audited books and not disproved by tax authority. Additions under Section 69A cannot rest on suspicion alone.
The High Court held that an addition for unexplained investment cannot rest solely on an unsigned and unexecuted agreement. The key takeaway is that Section 69 requires concrete evidence of actual payment, not assumptions drawn from incomplete documents.
The tribunal held that penalty under section 271(1)(c) cannot be levied where income admitted during survey is duly declared in the return and accepted in assessment. The key takeaway is that absence of concealment or inaccurate particulars bars penalty, even if disclosure arose from a survey.
The Tribunal held that cash deposited in demonetised notes cannot be taxed under Section 69A when it represents recorded business sales. The key takeaway is that duly accounted turnover cannot be treated as unexplained merely due to demonetisation.
ITAT Hyderabad held that notices under Section 148 issued on 01.04.2021 without following mandatory Section 148A procedures are invalid. The Tribunal quashed reassessment orders, emphasizing that procedural compliance is jurisdictional and essential.
Gattula Lakshmi Madhavi Vs ACIT (ITAT Visakhapatnam) Central Circle Cannot Assume Reassessment Powers — Section 148 Notice Issued Outside Faceless Regime Held Void The Visakhapatnam Bench of the ITAT quashed the reassessment framed under Section 147 and consequential penalties under Sections 270A and 271AAC in the case of Gattula Lakshmi Madhavi v. ACIT, holding that […]
