Income Tax : ITAT held that additions based solely on third-party search material without independent evidence or cross-examination are invalid...
Income Tax : A detailed look at how the Finance Act, 2021 reshaped Sections 147–151, introduced Section 148A, and reduced limitation periods ...
Income Tax : The Finance Bill, 2026 clarifies who can issue notices under sections 148 and 148A. It confirms that only jurisdictional Assessing...
Goods and Services Tax : The court held that once late fee is imposed for delayed annual return filing, a further general penalty is not permissible. Secti...
Income Tax : The issue was whether an assessment could be reopened after four years. The Court held that full disclosure by the taxpayer barred...
Income Tax : Learn about the new block assessment provisions for cases involving searches under section 132 and requisitions under section 132A...
Income Tax : Discover how Finance Act 2021 revamped assessment and reassessment procedures under Income-tax Act, impacting notices, time limits...
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 case examined reassessment based on third-party information without independent application of mind. The Tribunal ruled that r...
Income Tax : The Tribunal relied on Supreme Court precedent to hold that interest on tax arrears is compensatory, not penal. It ruled that such...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that absence of a clear charge in the penalty notice makes the proceedings invalid. It ruled that failure to spe...
Income Tax : The case examined validity of a reassessment notice issued beyond statutory limits. The ITAT held the notice invalid as it exceede...
Income Tax : The Tribunal upheld reopening under Section 147 as Form 26AS reflected substantial contract receipts despite no return being filed...
Income Tax : ITAT Chandigarh held that ITO Ward-3(1), Chandigarh had no jurisdiction to issue notice to an NRI and hence consequently the asses...
Excise Duty : Notification No. 29/2024-Central Excise rescinds six 2022 excise notifications in the public interest, effective immediately. Deta...
Income Tax : Learn how to initiate proceedings under section 147 of the IT Act in e-Verification cases. Detailed instructions for Assessing Off...
Income Tax : Explore e-Verification Instruction No. 2 of 2024 from the Directorate of Income Tax (Systems). Detailed guidelines for AOs under I...
Income Tax : Supreme Court in the matter of Shri Ashish Agarwal, several representations were received asking for time-barring date of such cas...
Court is not satisfied that the Petitioner has made out any case for interference by the Court at the present stage, i.e. the stage of issuance of the notice for reopening of the assessment under Section 147
Finance Act, 2021 made the existing procedure of reassessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act (‘Act’) completely redundant by substituting it with a new reassessment procedure. Memorandum Explaining the Finance Bill, 2021 makes it amply clear that such changes are killing two birds with one stone viz. 1. Less Litigations and 2. Ease of Doing business for the taxpayers.
Re-opening of the assessment proceeding was conducted on the basis of legally valid sanction accorded by the authority under provisions of Section 151 and the same was justified as it had been initiated on the basis of the material which had given rise to reason to believe as well as escapement of assessment had been quantified by AO.
Author: Anadi Varma NEW REASSESSMENT PROCEDURE 1. Introduction: In the film JOLLY LLB, the judge, unforgettably played by actor Saurabh Shukla, in the concluding speech while delivering his judgment says: ‘But I am the judge. who knows what, what I feel, judgment cannot be given on that basis. I HAVE TO GIVE JUDGMENT ON THE […]
M/s. Kone Elevators (India) Pvt. Limited Vs ACIT (Madras High Court) Undoubtedly, the assessee had not submitted the ratification certificate to be obtained from the CBDT for claiming exemption under Section 10B of the Act. However, there are certain confusions even within the Department Officials regarding production of such ratification certificate from the CBDT. The […]
Soul Jewels Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) We find that assessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of trading in diamonds. The original assessment was completed for the A.Y.2007-08 u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the Act determining the total income at Rs.56,34,520/- vide order dated 27/12/2011. This assessment was sought to be reopened by issue […]
While recording of the reasons to reopen an assessment, AO was required to form only prima Facie opinions about escapement of income as he was not making an assessment but taking a first baby step for making the assessment by forming a reasonable belief that whether the claim of assessee should be tested in reassessment proceedings or not. Thus, there was no infirmity in the action of AO that reasoned escapement of income by claiming deduction of Rs. 1 crore u/s 54EC.
Modi Industries Limited vs CIT (Supreme Court) Having regard to the scheme of the Act and use of the phrase `regular assessment’ in various sections of the Act – we are of the view that in Section 214, `regular assessment’ has been used in no other sense than the first order of assessment passed under […]
CavinKare Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (Madras High Court) It is the case of the petitioner that reopening of the assessment was based on the change of opinion for the year 2011-2012, and there was no ground for reopening of the assessment under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act for the purpose of Section 147 […]
Uttarakhand Purv Sainik Kalyan Nigam Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Dehradun) Reassessment on the basis of change of opinion, bad-in-law, more-so, when the case was re-opened after the expiry of four year and there was no non-disclosure which could be attributable to the assessee A) Re-opening of assessment on the same issue which was dealt during […]
