Income Tax : The Income Tax Act, 2025 replaces old reassessment provisions with Sections 279 to 286 and increases reopening timelines in certai...
Income Tax : Explains how routine approvals under Section 151 can nullify reassessment proceedings. The key takeaway is that lack of applicatio...
Income Tax : The ITAT held that reassessment cannot run parallel to ongoing scrutiny proceedings. Such action was declared without jurisdiction...
Income Tax : The High Court held that reassessment proceedings for AY 2013-14 were time-barred after computing the surviving limitation as clar...
Income Tax : A detailed look at how the Finance Act, 2021 reshaped Sections 147–151, introduced Section 148A, and reduced limitation periods ...
Income Tax : Discover how Finance Act 2021 revamped assessment and reassessment procedures under Income-tax Act, impacting notices, time limits...
Income Tax : Humble Representation for modification of Section 151 of the Income Tax Act relating to Sanction for issue of Notice under sec. 14...
Income Tax : Income Tax Gazetted Officers’ Association requested CBDT to issue Clarification in respect of the judgement of Hon’ble Supreme...
Income Tax : In view of Indiscriminate notices by income Tax Department without allowing reasonable time it is requested to Finance Ministry an...
Income Tax : Lucknow CA Tax Practicioners Association has made a Representation to FM for Extension of Time Limit for Assessment cases time bar...
Income Tax : The Madras High Court held that reassessment notices required to be issued by the Faceless Assessing Officer are invalid if issued...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held reassessment orders invalid because the assessee was not supplied with the recorded reasons for reopening under Se...
Income Tax : The Supreme Court dismissed the challenge to a Delhi High Court ruling that quashed reassessment proceedings under Sections 148A(d...
Income Tax : The Telangana High Court held that reassessment proceedings initiated by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer after implementation...
Income Tax : Gujarat HC held that reassessment under Sections 147 and 148 was valid where Assessing Officer received fresh investigation materi...
Income Tax : The department has identified high-risk cases through its Insight Portal for AYs 2022-25. It directs officers to initiate reassess...
Income Tax : Supreme Court in the matter of Shri Ashish Agarwal, several representations were received asking for time-barring date of such cas...
Corporate Law : Income Tax Gazetted Officers’ Association (W.B.) Unit Date: 02.02.2023. To The Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, W...
Income Tax : CBDT directed that cases reopened u/s 147/148A in consonance with Judgement of SC in case of UoI vs. Ashish Agarwal & CBDT instruc...
Income Tax : Consequent to order passed by Allahabad High Court passing severe strictures and proposing to levy exemplary cost of Rs 50 lakhs i...
Tata Capital Financial Services Limited Vs ACIT (Bombay High Court) Bombay High court (HC) lays guidelines on reopening cases for assessing officer (AO) for strict compliance Bombay high court coming down heavily on income tax department in section 148 reopening cases where revenue is held not transparent with tax payers in sharing of requested information […]
Mangalore Refinery and Petrochemicals Limited Vs DCIT (Bombay High Court) Lastly, it would be contextually relevant to note that the rejection of the objections to the reopening also suffers from a familiar error, which the notices for reopening usually manifest. The Assessing Officer in the impugned order recorded that though the details of the expenses were […]
ACIT Vs Ravi Parkash Aggarwal (ITAT Delhi) Primarily, we find that the reasons recorded by the assessee are too sketchy and does not instill any confidence with regard to the reasons recorded for reopening. It is not even clear whether the assessee has received entries pertaining to loans or purchases. The details of the report […]
Macrotech Developers Limited Vs ACIT (Bombay High Court) The question is whether there was a failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessment of Assessment Year 2012-13. It is not the case that there is failure on the part of the assessee to make […]
Tata Sons Limited Vs DCIT (Bombay High Court) This is a case where the scrutiny assessment was completed and order under section 143(3) of the Act has been passed followed by a rectification order under section 154 of the Act. Therefore Petitioner’s case has been considered at two stages, (i) When the assessment order was […]
Nirmal Bang Securities Pvt Ltd Vs ACIT (Bombay High Court) In this case reasons quoted were bereft of any material as AO quoted that search information is received with regard to accommodation entry But does not indicate what address was searched, from whom such information was received, what date the search happened, what date the […]
Rationalization of provisions relating to assessment and reassessment The Finance Act, 2021 amended the procedure for assessment or reassessment of income in the Act with effect from the 1st April, 2021. The said amendment modified, inter alia, sections 147, section 148, section 149 and also introduced a new section 148A in the Act. In cases […]
Sudesh Taneja Vs ITO (Rajasthan High Court) In the writ petitions the petitioners have challenged respective notices issued by the Assessing Officers under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ for short) for reopening assessments for various assessment years. All these notices have been issued after 01.04.2021 and pertain to relevant period […]
Giraben Atulbhai Shah Vs ACIT (Gujarat High Court) The objections raised by the assessee came to be disposed of by the Assessing Officer vide his order dated 16th November 2021 stating that the assessee sold immovable property for an aggregate value of Rs.52 Lakh and the same was not offered for tax in the return […]
Court has held that beyond a period of 4 years, retrospective amendment u/s 115JB of the Act could not be a ground for reassessment. Such legal proposition requires no authority of law.
