2 Section 147

Section 147 - Page 10

Invocation of jurisdiction under Section 147 is not alternative to Section 263

Plaza Cable Industries Ltd Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi)

Plaza Cable Industries Ltd Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) The maintainability of jurisdiction under Section 147 of the Act is central to the controversy in the instant case. On perusal of the reasons recorded under Section 148(2) of the Act qua the alleged escapement as reproduced in paragraph 6 above, it is straightaway noticed that the […]...

Read More

Assessment order on issue other than reasons recorded for reopening is unsustainable

Bharat Singh Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi)

Assessment framed by the AO is on other issues which is not part of the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment. In such a situation, the assessment order is not sustainable in the eye of law....

Read More

Section 147/143(3) Assessment is null & void in absence of service of Section 148/143(2) notice

ACIT Vs Lekhraj & Sons (ITAT Delhi)

ITAT held that the absence of service of notice u/s 148/143(2) of the Act, reassessment framed u/s 147 r.w.s 143(3) of the Act will be null and void....

Read More

Change of Opinion cannot be alleged If AO finds Fresh Tangible Materials

Mamta Gupta Vs ACIT (Delhi High Court)

HC held that despite lapse of four years and a scrutiny assessment, there is fresh tangible material in the present case in the form of information of beneficiaries of bogus LTCL/STCL report prepared by the office of Deputy Director of Income Tax (Investigation) which reveals that Mahanivesh (India) Ltd. is a penny stock whose share price...

Read More

Mere reproduction of conclusions of investigation report in own words by AO is borrowed satisfaction

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Vs M. K. Wood India Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Delhi)

Merely reproducing the conclusions of investigation report in his own words is indeed borrowed satisfaction as contended by counsel for the assessee. Consequently, the Bench is inclined to decide these grounds of cross objection in favour of the assessee....

Read More

Reopening beyond 4 years is bad in law if all primary facts disclosed during original assessment proceedings

Harsh Kaushal Corporation Vs Income Tax Officer (Bombay High Court)

Harsh Kaushal Corporation Vs ITO (Bombay High Court) In the present case, it is evident from the reasons recorded for reopening that the petitioner had truly and fully disclosed all material facts necessary for the purpose of assessment. In fact, in the reasons for reopening, there is not even a whisper as to what was […]...

Read More

Constitutionality of First Proviso to Section 148 – Rajasthan HC Issues Notice To Govt

Maya Rathi Vs ITO (Rajasthan High Court)

Maya Rathi Vs ITO (Rajasthan High Court) We find that the validity of first proviso to Section 148 of Income Tax Act, 1961 has been assailed on the ground that the explanation ‘income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment’, has been restricted in its meaning under the explanation-1 to that provisions. Learned counsel for th...

Read More

Reassessment quashed by HC for Non-Consideration of Objection

Jasmine Bonny Agitok Sangma Vs Union of India (Meghalaya High Court)

Impugned order under clause (d) of Section 148A of the Act was issued on April 1, 2022 without taking the petitioner’s response to the initial notice into consideration....

Read More

Reassessment merely based on Investigation Wing information is invalid

Uma Strips Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi)

Uma Strips Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) In this case ITAT find that there is no live link presented by the AO between the material available with him i.e. the report of the investigation and to reason to belief that the assessee has tried to evade the assessment for the particular year in question. Simply […]...

Read More

Madras HC directs dept to follow SC Judgment in UOI Vs. Ashish Agarwal

Giant Construction Company Vs DCIT (Madras High Court)

Giant Construction Company Vs DCIT (Madras High Court) The petitioner assails the communication dated 21.04.2022 by which the objections raised by the petitioner to the reopening of the assessment were rejected. The petitioner asserts that the impugned communication is in contravention of the amended Section 148-A of the Income Tax Act, 1...

Read More

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (6,281)
Company Law (8,866)
Corporate Law (11,272)
Custom Duty (9,763)
DGFT (4,928)
Excise Duty (5,019)
Fema / RBI (5,403)
Finance (5,891)
Income Tax (44,139)
SEBI (4,751)
Service Tax (4,187)