Income Tax : Learn how different types of income tax assessments are conducted under the Income-tax Act. The FAQs explain assessment procedures...
Income Tax : This guide explains who is required to maintain books of account under Section 44AA based on business, profession, turnover, and i...
Income Tax : This guide explains the various assessments under the Income-tax Act, including summary assessment, scrutiny assessment, best judg...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai held that an addition under Section 69A cannot be sustained when the assessee is denied the opportunity to cross-exami...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that CIT(A) cannot enhance income under Section 251 on matters not considered by the Assessing Officer during as...
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 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 Ahmedabad held that an addition under Section 68 cannot be sustained solely on information received from the Investigation Wi...
Income Tax : The ITAT Hyderabad held that the entire sale consideration could not be assessed as short-term capital gains without examining the...
Income Tax : ITAT Pune held that the reassessment proceedings were invalid because the notice under Section 148 was approved by the Principal C...
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...
CIT Vs Mr. John Ettimootil Samuel (Madras High Court) 1. Sets aside reassessment framed u/s 147 after expiry of four years of assessment u/s 143(3), holding that the assessee had disclosed all material facts in the original assessment qua consideration and deemed consideration u/s 50C of the Act. 2. The Tribunal was fully justified in […]
Jansampark Advertising & Marketing P. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) Settled position of law as held by the Hon’ble High Court in the case of Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Co. v. Commissioner of Income Tax 308 ITR 38 [ Delhi] is that the requirement of recording the reasons, communicating the same to the assessee, enabling the […]
SJM International Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) The conclusion of the Assessing Officer at the end of the reasons recorded as noted above is contradictory. In the first two lines, the Assessing Officer has recorded the finding that the sum of Rs.2,35,00,000/- has escaped assessment but in the last two lines, he has recorded that […]
Lakhmi Chand Tejoo Mal Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) MULTIPLICITY OF ERRORS IN REASONS MAKE REASSESSMENT VOID The ld. counsel for the assessee vehemently stated that 11 entries have been shown in the information and it can be seen that there are repetition of same entries/amounts and the Assessing Officer has, in fact, at para -6 […]
DCIT Vs Paveljeet Singh Ruppal (ITAT Delhi) The Assessing Officer has to demonstrate from the records that there has been a failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment. Here in this case, the assessee has duly disclosed the factum of total secured loan, total […]
ACIT Vs Sahyog Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd (ITAT Delhi) Based on the above reasons recorded, notice under Section 148 of the act was issued to the assessee on 25th of June, 2013. From the above reasons recorded it is evident that all these documents were available with the ld. Assessing Officer at the time of making […]
Any order of the subordinate authority which could have been considered as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue in allowing assessee’s claim of deduction under section 80IA, either due to lack of enquiry or otherwise, was the original assessment order passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C and not the re-assessment order. PCIT had proceeded to revise the assessment order passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 to get over the hurdle of limitation which was impermissible.
Principal Officer, M/s. Vedanta Limited Vs DCIT (Madras High Court) As far as the present Writ Petition is concerned, admittedly, the notice under Section 148 was issued in a wrong name. However, close reading of the name of the Company would reveal that the first word ‘Sesa’ is not alien to the petitioner Company and […]
PCIT Vs Superior Films Private Limited (Delhi High Court) When the assessee has filed a return u/s 139 of the Act or in response to sections 142(1) or 148 of the I.T.Act and when an assessment order u/s 143(3) or u /s 147 of the Act has already been passed then the assessee enjoys statutory […]
In present facts of the case, it was observed that in the absence of reasons, the jurisdiction assumed under section 148 of the Act to reopen a completed assessment is clearly void ab initio and consequently, assessment order is bad in law.
