Reassessment

Mohanlal Champalal Jain Vs ITO (Bombay High Court) Assessing Officer has proceeded on wrong premise that even when called upon to state why the petitioner had not filed return of income, he had not responded to the said query. The petitioner did communicate to the Department that he had no taxable income and therefore, there […]...

Impugned notice of reopening of assessment was issued on a dead person. There are several judgments of different High Courts holding that the notice or reopening of assessment is invalid in law. Suffice it to say, as per the settled law, notice for reopening of assessment against a dead person is invalid....

Cenveo Publisher Services India Ltd Vs. UOI (Bombay High Court) In this case the petitioner raised objections promptly after withdrawing the petition from this Court, would not in any manner dilute the fact that it was on the ground of the petitioner’s conduct that the Assessing Officer was left with little time to dispose of [&hell...

ITO Vs S. M. Batha Education Trust (ITAT Pune) In the absence of pending return of income, the provisions of section 143(2) of the Act is clear that notice can be issued only when a valid return is pending for assessment. Reassessment proceedings is invalid if notice U/sec.143(2) is issued prior to filing of return […]...

CIT Vs. M/s. Indian Potash Ltd. (Madras High Court) The Tribunal has recorded a factual finding that the Assessee has disclosed the figure of provision for bad debts and doubtful debts and interest income also in the Profit and Loss Account submitted along with the return of income. Therefore, the Tribunal held that there is […]...

High Court was not justified in dismissing the appeal on the ground that the appeal did not involve any substantial question of law as it had to decide validity of s. 148 notice, whether notice based on change of opinion, assessed reasons to believe and findings recorded by ITAT on merits whether was legally sustainable. ...

Reassessment order passed without disposal of objections raised by assessee by passing a speaking order by AO was illegal and invalid....

Reassessment was rightly opened under section 147 by AO as he had received fresh and tangible material being incriminating information from DGIT(Inv.) which in turn was based on incriminating information received from VAT authorities that assessee to be beneficiary of alleged bogus purchases and it was sufficient to reopen  concluded ass...

Precilion Holdings Limited Vs DCIT (Bombay High Court) Conclusion: AO was not permitted to reopen assessment merely because in the later year, he took a different view on the basis of similar material available at the time of original scrutiny assessment as there was no failure on the part of assessee to disclose truly and […]...

Bharti Infratel Limited Vs DCIT (Delhi High Court) Conclusion: Notice for re-assessment issued under Section 148 against assessee-company was quashed as assessee had made full and true disclosure of material facts; nothing was concealed, withheld and left to be factually discovered in the form of ‘material’ mentioned in detail in acco...