2 Section 147

Section 147 - Page 20

Reopening on review of same material considered in original assessment invalid

Mangalore Refinery and Petrochemicals Limited Vs DCIT (Bombay High Court)

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 detail...

Read More

Issue of Section 148 notice on non-existing entity is not a curable mistake

Implenia Services and Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT/DCIT (Bombay High Court)

Where notice under section 148 was issued to a non-existing entity as said entity ceased to exist at the time of the issue of the notice on account of merger; the said notice was liable to be quashed and it was not an error that could be corrected under section 292B....

Read More

Reopening notice invalid in absence of any tangible material to establish escapement of income for assessment

ACIT Vs Ravi Parkash Aggarwal (ITAT Delhi)

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 […]...

Read More

AO not entitled on change of opinion to commence reassessment proceedings

Macrotech Developers Limited Vs ACIT (Bombay High Court)

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 […]...

Read More

AO cannot reopen an assessment even within a period of 4 years merely on the basis of a change of opinion

Glaxosmithkline Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Vs DCIT (Bombay High Court)

Glaxosmithkline Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Vs ACIT/DCIT (Bombay High Court) Admittedly, this is a case where the notice under Section 148 of the Act has been issued after the expiry of 4 years from the end of the relevant assessment year and assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act has also been completed. Hence, proviso to Section […]...

Read More

Review in the garb of reassessment is absolutely prohibited

Tata Sons Limited Vs DCIT (Bombay High Court)

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 […]...

Read More

HC surprised with reasons recorded for reopening & hoped for better reasons

Nirmal Bang Securities Pvt Ltd Vs ACIT (Bombay High Court)

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 [&he...

Read More

HC dismisses Reassessment Notice to Tata Sons Based on mere change of opinion

Tata Sons Limited Vs DCIT (Bombay High Court)

Tata Sons Limited Vs DCIT (Bombay High Court) Bombay High Court find substance in the submission of Mr.Pardiwalla that the case at hand is nothing but an instance of mere change of opinion. A bare perusal of the reasons indicates that the exercise was infuenced by a mere change of opinion. To start with, it […]...

Read More

Failure to issue section 143(2) notice prior to finalising reassessment order makes reassessment proceedings a nullity

ACIT Vs P & R Infraprojects Ltd. (ITAT Delhi)

ACIT Vs P & R Infraprojects Ltd. (ITAT Delhi) A perusal of the assessment order as well as the order of the CIT(A) shows that no notice u/s 143(2) was ever issued to the assessee before completing the assessment u/s 143(3)/147. It is the submission of the ld. Counsel that it is mandatory to issue […]...

Read More

Division Bench of Rajasthan HC Quashes Section 148 notices in 472 cases

Introduction: – The Division Bench of Hon. Rajasthan High Court consisting of Chief Justice Akil kureshi and Justice Sameer Jain. in Sudesh Taneja vs. ITO DB W.P No.969/2022. Order dated 27.01.22 quashed the reassessment notices issued after 31.03.21. Earlier the Ld. Single judge of Hon. Rajasthan HC had quashed reassessment notices...

Read More
Posted Under: Income Tax |

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (6,281)
Company Law (8,866)
Corporate Law (11,272)
Custom Duty (9,729)
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)