Income Tax : Understand the statutory time limits for issuing income-tax notices and completing assessments under the Income-tax Act. The guide...
Income Tax : This article explains why reassessment proceedings may be invalid if the Assessing Officer merely relies on Investigation Wing rep...
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 : 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 : Bombay HC upheld ITAT's order, holding reassessment under Section 148 unsustainable as full reasons were not supplied and relied o...
Income Tax : The Bombay High Court held that reassessment proceedings for AY 2018-19 were invalid because the sanction was granted by the PCIT ...
Income Tax : The ITAT held that reassessment notices issued after the surviving limitation period prescribed by the Supreme Court were invalid....
Income Tax : The Gujarat High Court held that reassessment cannot be sustained merely because of high-value bank transactions without evidence ...
Income Tax : ITAT Pune held that reassessment proceedings were invalid because the approval under Section 151 was granted by the Principal Comm...
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...
Bombay High Court held that for an assessment to be reopened beyond a period of four years there must an omission or failure on part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessment and should not merely be the change of opinion of Assessing Officer (AO).
Shujaat Ali Khan Vs ITO (ITAT Jaipur) Facts- Case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 and notice u/s 148 was issued. The assessment U/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 was completed after making addition of Rs. 7,71,826/- being alleged undisclosed short-term capital gain on alleged sale of immovable property after invoking Section 50C of the Act. […]
Assessment was sought to be reopened not on account of failure of assessee to disclose truly and fully all material facts that were necessary for computation of income but on account of change of opinion of AO about the manner of computation of the deduction under Section 57, therefore, the same was invalid.
Reassessment under section 148 was not justified as ‘reason to believe’ that income for the AY in question had escaped assessment was based on a mere ‘change of opinion’.
Cognizant Technology Solutions India P. Ltd. Vs Asst.CIT (Madras High Court) Facts- Impugned notice was issued under section 148 for reopening of the assessment. The petitioner questioned the legal validity of the initiation of the reopening proceedings. Conclusion- If the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that the particular issue has not been considered or […]
Transway Wine Pvt. Ltd. Vs PCIT (Calcutta High Court) Impugned notice is quashed solely on the ground that the impugned notice was issued in the name of non-existing company in spite of revenue having notice and knowledge of non-existence of such Company. Quashing of this notice will not prevent the respondents from issuing fresh notice in […]
Madan Mohan Tiwari Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) Once information received by AO were shown in objections as incorrect, entire jurisdiction on such reasons cease to exist and thus reopening should be dropped. Such non application of mind therefore at recording reasons as well as disposal of objections invalidate entire reopening. FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER […]
The AO reopened the assessment of the Assessee after it was observed that the Assessee had not reflected or explained his investment in a hotel project during a survey operation. Thereafter, the Assessee filed an application before the CIT(A) challenging the validity of reopening of assessment, which was subsequently rejected and disposed of by the CIT(A) on the ground that the AO had correctly followed the procedure as contemplated in the IT Act and there was no infirmity in the action of the AO regarding reopening, all of which has been in accordance with law.
Hon’ble Tribunal uphold the observations of Ld. CIT(A) wherein it was observed that in order to assess the asset/bank account held by a third party in the hands of the respondent assessee the department has to prove that the assessee has direct beneficial interest in the asset/bank account held by third party.
CIT Vs John Ettimootil Samuel (Madras High Court) The Tribunal, in our view, rightly took note of the fact that the reopening of the assessment was after four years and there was no tangible material to establish that the assessee failed to disclose fully and truly all materials, which are required for the assessment at […]
