Income Tax : Explore the Bombay High Court's ruling on the invalidity of a reassessment notice under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, f...
Income Tax : Explore the legality of issuing a second notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the same assessment year. Unders...
Income Tax : Explore the latest changes in Income Tax laws, including extinguishment of demands, return processing, form amendments, exemptions...
Income Tax : Discover the consequences of incorrect SFT reporting triggering U/s 148A notices under the Income Tax Act, 1961. Learn from a deta...
Goods and Services Tax : Explore the proposed penalties in Finance Bill 2024 for non-registration of machines under GST. Analysis of Section 122A and the i...
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 : Lucknow CA Tax Practicioners Association has made a Representation to FM for Extension of Time Limit for Assessment cases time bar...
Income Tax : DTPA has made a representation to Finance Minister, Smt. Nirmala Sitharaman and requested for for recalling notices under section...
Income Tax : Read the detailed analysis of Indira Ramaiah Vs ITO case by ITAT Bangalore. ITAT upheld the addition of gift for undisclosed inves...
Income Tax : In this case, Gudiyatham Muniraj Ashokkumaran challenged an assessment order, citing breach of natural justice principles due to i...
Income Tax : Gujarat High Court quashes Income Tax reassessment notice against Deepak Natvarlal Pankhiyani HUF, citing lack of fresh evidence s...
Income Tax : Assessee was engaged in diamond manufacturing, trading, and windmill power generation, had claimed deductions under sections 35DD ...
Income Tax : ITAT Raipur order on Rajesh Kumar Tiwari vs ITO. ITAT sets aside Income Tax reassessment completed without providing fair & reason...
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...
Hon. Madhya Pradesh (MP) High Court (HC) Quashes Sec. 148 Notice Issued After 31st March 21 The Division Bench of Hon. Madhya Pradesh High Court consisting of Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Maninder Singh Bhatti in Yuvraj Jain vs. ITO W.P No.28293 of 2021. Order dated 03.03.22 quashed the reassessment notice issued after 31.03.21. Contentions […]
The pertinent assertion of learned counsel Shri Gargieya is that the assessing authority could not have adopted the procedure provided under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act for reopening the assessment of the petitioner because such action was taken on the basis of facts revealed to the assessing authority during the assessment of DRA Group at Ahmedabad and the proceedings, if any, would have to be conducted under Section 153A read with Section 153C of the Income Tax Act.
In view of Indiscriminate notices by income Tax Department without allowing reasonable time it is requested to Finance Ministry and CBDT that suitable steps should be taken so that adequate time is allowed for compliance and cases are not disposed of in a hurry, without giving adequate opportunity for the taxpayer to be heard. The […]
Lucknow CA Tax Practicioners Association has made a Representation to FM for Extension of Time Limit for Assessment cases time barring as on 31.3.22 under the Income Tax Act 1961 in view of Problems faced in completion of Reopened Assessment cases (letting time barred on 31st March 2022, Problems faced in completion of Assessment as […]
M N Dastur & Co Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Bangalore) In the present case the reopening beyond 4 years has been done by getting the approval of Addl. Commissioner and not from the Commissioner or Pr. Commissioner or Pr. Chief Commissioner. Therefore, the initiation of the proceedings u/s 148 of the Act was invalid. […]
HC directs Ao to pass a reasoned and speaking order after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or its authorised representative within eight weeks from the date of communication of this order and all further proceedings will depend upon the final out come of the order to be passed by the respondents on the aforesaid representation.
Daujee Abhushan Bhandar Pvt. Ltd Vs Union of India (Allahabad High Court) Considering the provisions of Section 282 and 282 A of the Act, 1961 and the provisions of Section 13 of the Act, 2000 and meaning of the word “issue” we find that firstly notice shall be signed by the assessing authority and then […]
Chhagan Chandrakant Bhujbal Vs ITO (Bombay High Court) Power vested in the commissioner under Section 151 of the Act to grant or not to grant approval to the Assessing Officer to re-open an assessment is coupled with duty and the commissioner is duty bound to apply his mind to the proposal put up to him […]
ACIT Vs Rakhi Properties and Leasing Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai) We observe that Assessing Officer completed the assessment based on the reasons recorded for reopening that assessee has received share application money from Mr. Shirish C. Shah, who provides accommodation entries. Subsequently when the remand report filed before Ld.CIT(A) in which Assessing Officer has agreed […]
Reopening of an assessment under Section 148 was not justified on the ground that AO was of the opinion that a contingency might arise in future resulting an escapement of income which would be wholly impermissible and would amount to a rewriting of the statutory provision.
