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...
SG Corporation Joint Venture Vs ITO & Ors. (Delhi High Court) 1. The respondents are restrained from continuing with the reassessment proceedings, in any manner, pursuant to the impugned notices. 2. No adjournment shall be granted on the next date of hearing. FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT ORDER /JUDGEMENT On 13th July, 2021, this […]
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 […]
In the case of the assessee at present no finding was recorded in the assessment order that there was concealment of income.The assessee has not furnished inaccurate particulars of its income.True income of the assesseee was declared in the return filed by the assessee after issue of the notice u/ s 148 of the act . And the case of the assessee was made u/s 143(3) of the act on the same returned income.
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 […]
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 […]
Ajay Mittal Vs ACIT (Delhi High Court) Hon’ble Delhi High Court on validity of 19 notices issued u/s 148(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 restraining the Revenue from continuing with the reassessment proceedings, in any manner, pursuant to the impugned notices. FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF DELHI HIGH COURT 1. On 13th July, 2021, this […]
Bhagwati Prasad Jalan Vs Union Of India And Ors. (Calcutta High Court) The learned Advocate for the respondents is not able to deny the allegations of the petitioners that Section 148A provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was not complied with in this case before issuing notice under Section 148 of the said Act and […]
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 […]
