Income Tax : SC clarifies reassessment notices under TOLA and Finance Act 2021 in Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal. Learn how decision impacts t...
Income Tax : The Supreme Court’s Rajeev Bansal case clarified the validity of reassessment notices for AY 2013-14 to 2018-19 and introduced t...
Income Tax : Supreme Court's verdict on Section 148 notices raises uncertainty in 90,000 cases. Learn its impact on assessment and pending tax ...
Income Tax : Explore the Bombay High Court ruling on reassessments under the Income Tax Act, clarifying jurisdiction between JAO and FAO in the...
Income Tax : The Supreme Court upholds TOLA, validating extended income tax reassessment timelines despite previous High Court rulings on Secti...
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 : 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 : As noticed earlier, the provisions of sec. 147 of the Act makes it mandatory that the AO should be clear about the alleged escapem...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held that based on incriminating materials unearthed during the course of search, proceedings under section 153C of the...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi remanded the matter back to CIT(A) since CIT(A) failed to examined the validity of jurisdiction under section 148 of th...
Income Tax : Assessee argued that AO lacked jurisdiction to initiate proceedings under Section 147/148 as the information derived from the sear...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai held that validity of notice issued under section 148 of the Income Tax Act for AY 2015-16 is six year which expires o...
Income Tax : Explore the latest guidelines for issuing notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Understand key procedures, amendme...
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...
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 : Consequent to order passed by Allahabad High Court passing severe strictures and proposing to levy exemplary cost of Rs 50 lakhs i...
As noticed earlier, the provisions of sec. 147 of the Act makes it mandatory that the AO should be clear about the alleged escapement of income while recording reasons for reopening of assessment.
ITAT Delhi held that based on incriminating materials unearthed during the course of search, proceedings under section 153C of the Income Tax Act needs to be initiated. Hence, initiation of proceedings u/s. 148 illegal and void ab initio.
ITAT Delhi remanded the matter back to CIT(A) since CIT(A) failed to examined the validity of jurisdiction under section 148 of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, order set aside and matter remanded back.
Assessee argued that AO lacked jurisdiction to initiate proceedings under Section 147/148 as the information derived from the search should had been assessed under Section 153C.
ITAT Mumbai held that validity of notice issued under section 148 of the Income Tax Act for AY 2015-16 is six year which expires on 31.03.2022. Accordingly, notice issued on 29.07.2022 u/s. 148 is barred by limitation.
Assessee had not challenged the validity of reopening, though for the first time, assessee had challenged the action of AO by taking plea that AO should have assessed assessee under section 153C and not section 147/148.
Madras High Court granted stay on payment of 10% of tax demand since the respondent/ department failed to furnish proof against alleged demand. Accordingly, order set aside and stay granted.
Assessee had given reasons that as per the previous counsel, late Shri R.R. Jain (C.A.) had given advice no separate appeal against the order passed u/s 263 was filed before ITAT.
ITAT Ahmedabad imposed cost of Rs. 10,000 on the assessee due to non-compliance with the show cause notice and directed to restore the matter back to the file of Jurisdictional Assessing Officer.
ITAT Kolkata held that in terms of block assessment under section 153A of the Income Tax Act, reopening of unabated assessment without any incriminating material found with respect to concerned assessment year is impermissible in law.
