Income Tax : Smt. Ranjana Kumari/Kalta Vs DCIT/ACIT (Central) (ITAT Chandigarh) The appeals involved three assessees belonging to the Kalta Gro...
Income Tax : Learn the updated provisions governing rectification, assessments, reassessments, and appeals under the Income-tax Act. This guide...
Income Tax : The article explains how the Finance Acts, 2025 and 2026 have reshaped the Updated Return regime under Section 139(8A). It highlig...
Income Tax : The Supreme Court has remitted reassessment cases for fresh consideration after the retrospective insertion of Section 147A, leavi...
Income Tax : This article explains why reassessment proceedings may be invalid if the Assessing Officer merely relies on Investigation Wing rep...
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 : Bombay HC quashed Section 148 reopening for AY 2013-14, holding Section 43CA was inapplicable and stamp duty valuation alone could...
Income Tax : ITAT Pune quashed a Section 148 notice based on vague information and directed deletion of a ₹51.35 lakh addition for lack of su...
Income Tax : Where unaccounted sales were established through seized material, only the net profit embedded therein was liable to tax, and not ...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai remanded the case to examine whether Section 56(2)(x) applied based on the agreement date and to consider refund of ex...
Income Tax : ITAT Bangalore remanded a Section 69A addition after holding that an APMC commission agent's entire sale proceeds could not be tre...
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...
ITAT Hyderabad held that for re-assessment beyond a period of 4 years, recording of satisfaction by the CIT is a must under the Income Tax Act, 1961. In absence of the same, re-assessment proceedings are invalid.
ITAT Mumbai held that reopening of assessment u/s 147 without recording any specific reasons and without linking the information received from DDIT(Inv) specifically to assessee is invalid and liable to be set aside.
ITAT Chandigarh set aside the addition u/s 69 of the Income Tax Act to the file of AO to test the enforceability of agreement to sell as per relevant statue vis-à-vis fresh affidavit.
Delhi High Court held that the legislative history of Section 245A of the Income Tax Act indicates that the proceedings for assessment, re-assessment and re-computation u/s. 148, prior to issuance of notice u/s. 148 of the Act, were excluded from the scope of the definition of the term ‘case’. Literal interpretation of language of section 245A is justifiable.
ITAT Delhi held that reassessment proceedings initiated u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act unsustainable as sufficient enquiry was made by AO on the impugned transaction and hence it tantamount to change of opinion on part of AO.
In the case being analyzed, the Delhi High Court referred to Explanation (i) to Clause (b) of Section 245A to determine whether the proceedings for assessment or reassessment had commenced for the assessment years 2012-13, 2013-14, and 2014-15. The court concluded that based on a plain reading of the explanation, no such proceedings had commenced during those years. As a result, the court upheld the decision of the Income Tax Settlement Commission to deem the petitioner’s application under Section 245C(1) invalid for those assessment years.
Calcutta High Court has overturned the order passed under Section 148A(d) of Income Tax Act and restored the matter to the stage of 148A(b).
Calcutta High Court has recently ruled that the issuance of notice and initiation of reassessment beyond six years is barred by limitation
HC set aside SCN issued under Section 148A(b) & consequential orders on the grounds that the opportunity of being heard provided at first instance should be an effective opportunity, since, the power of reopening an assessment is a ‘power’ which should be exercised with adequate reason.
The scope of reopening assessments under the Income Tax Act, 1961 (IT Act) remains unclear, despite several reformative changes introduced by the Parliament through the Finance Act, 2021.
