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 : ITAT held that additions based solely on third-party search material without independent evidence or cross-examination are invalid...
Income Tax : ITAT held that a return filed under section 148 remains valid even if delayed. Failure to issue mandatory notice under section 143...
Income Tax : Judicial rulings clarify that satisfaction for initiating action against other persons in search cases must be recorded promptly. ...
Income Tax : The Finance Bill 2026 proposes allowing taxpayers to file an Updated Return even after receiving a reassessment notice under 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 : ITAT Indore held that appellate order violated principles of natural justice after finding that key hearing notices were sent to a...
Income Tax : Court ruled that reassessment notices under Section 148 must be issued through the faceless mechanism under Section 151A and the 2...
Income Tax : The Madras High Court held that reassessment notices required to be issued by the Faceless Assessing Officer are invalid if issued...
Income Tax : The Madras High Court held that reassessment notices required to be issued by the Faceless Assessing Officer are invalid if issued...
Income Tax : The Jharkhand High Court held that retrospective insertion of Section 147A removed the jurisdictional challenge against reassessme...
Income Tax : The department has identified high-risk cases through its Insight Portal for AYs 2022-25. It directs officers to initiate reassess...
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...
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...
Keenara Industries Private Limited Vs ITO (Gujarat High Court) HC held that substituted provisions of sections 147 to 151 shall be applicable w.e.f. 01.04.2021, and as per First Proviso to Section 149, limitation as specified under unamended provision as it stood prior to 01.04.2021, shall be applicable. As per unamended provision prescribing limitation, no notice can […]
Keenara Industries Private Limited Vs ITO (Gujarat High Court) In the case of Keenara Industries Private Limited Vs ITO and other 256 cases Gujarat High Court set aside Notices under section 148 of Income Tax Act, 1961 and impugned orders under section 148A(d) on the ground of limitation. FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF GUJARAT HIGH […]
Bombay High Court held that initiation of reassessment proceeding under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, in absence of any failure on the part of the assessee to disclose any material facts fully and truly during the regular assessment proceedings, is mere change of opinion and hence liable to be quashed.
Rajeev Bansal Vs Union of India (Allahabad High Court) Allahabad high court in lead case of Rajeev bansal vs UOI (Writ Tax of 1086/2022) and others by division bench presided by justice sunita agarwal on issue of time barred notices u/s 149 first proviso under amended law (judgment reserved on 15 Dec 2022) has rejected […]
Bombay High Court held that reopening of assessment under section 148 in absence of any new information received by AO between the date of assessment order u/s 143(3) till the issuance of notice u/s 148 is unjustified and untenable in law.
HC quashed section 148 notice issued without sufficient reasons to initiate reassessment proceedings without satisfying conditions precedent under Section 147
Bombay High Court held that reopening of assessment in absence of failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly the material facts and also in absence of any tangible material is unjustifiable.
Revenue Department could only re-open an assessment beyond four years, if there was a failure on the part of assessee to disclose material facts fully and truly and not on the basis of reason to believe without satisfying jurisdictional condition required under provisions of Section 147
Bombay High Court held that AO failed to satisfy the direction given by the court while issuing notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, order for reopening of assessment and demanding penalty u/s 271(1)(c) are quashed and set aside.
If foundational allegation is missing in notice issued under Section 148A(b), the same cannot be incorporated by issuing a supplementary notice.
