Income Tax : Explore tax implications under Section 56(2)(vii)(b) and reassessment norms in property transactions. Judicial rulings emphasize e...
Income Tax : Explore key court rulings on reassessment under Section 148 post-2021 amendments, covering procedural changes, taxpayer rights, an...
Income Tax : Written submission against wrong cash deposit notice under Section 148A(b), highlighting errors and lack of independent inquiry....
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 : The Supreme Court's rulings clarify reassessment procedures under the Income Tax Act, addressing validity, TOLA implications, and ...
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...
Corporate Law : Non- extension of the Time Barring Date for assessment of reopened cases and issuance of the notices for reopening – difficu...
Income Tax : ITAT Surat cancels tax reassessment for AY 2015-16, ruling notice beyond 3 years invalid as alleged escaped income was below the â...
Income Tax : ITAT Jaipur held that reopening under section 148 r.w.s. 148A is bad-in-law and liable to be quashed in as much as reopening was m...
Income Tax : Delhi High Court sets aside a Section 148 income tax reassessment notice for Assessment Year 2015-16, ruling it time-barred based ...
Income Tax : Assessee challenged this, arguing the procedure under Section 148A was not followed. The Supreme Court ruled that notices after 31...
Income Tax : Thus, a substantial portion of the cause of action has accrued at Kolkata. Applying the principle of forum convenience, it would b...
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 : CBDT directed that cases reopened u/s 147/148A in consonance with Judgement of SC in case of UoI vs. Ashish Agarwal & CBDT instruc...
Income Tax : Consequent to order passed by Allahabad High Court passing severe strictures and proposing to levy exemplary cost of Rs 50 lakhs i...
Income Tax : Salient features of new Section 148 to 151A 'i.e. assessment/reassessment procedure of Income Escaping Assessment...
Explore the Gujarat High Court judgment on reopening an NRI assessment, analyzing investments from NRE accounts and failure to file income returns. Detailed legal insights provided.
Impugned order and notice indicated that sanctioning authority was PCIT. However, since issuance date of both documents was beyond three years from relevant assessment year, Section 151(ii) of Act mandated that sanctioning authority should have been PCCIT.
in terms of section 249(4)(a) of the Act, stipulation as to payment of tax ante filing of first appeal is only directory and not mandatory, where appeal is filed without payment of tax but subsequently required amount of tax is paid, appeal shall be admitted on making payment of tax and taken up for hearing on merits.
In case of Balaji Mines And Minerals Pvt Ltd vs ACIT, Bombay High Court ruled that reassessment cannot be based solely on reasons borrowed from other departments or reports, such as Justice M.B. Shah Commission Report.
In Nimir Kishore Mehta Vs ACIT, Bombay High Court invalidates notice & order under Section 148A(b), ruling AO lacked jurisdiction. Details & analysis here.
Detailed analysis of Bombay High Court’s ruling on Hexaware Technologies Ltd vs ACIT. Invalid notice under Section 148 scrutinized. Time limitation, violation of CBDT Circular, faceless regime, jurisdictional conditions, change of opinion, and more explored.
Kerala High Court nullifies Income Tax assessment order for 2016-17 after petitioner couldn’t attend video conferencing due to technical issue. Full judgment analysis.
The court’s deliberation highlights the absence of any challenge to the initial re-assessment order or its revision by the Commissioner. Furthermore, the judgment underscores the principle that one assessment order per assessee per assessment year should prevail unless annulled or set aside by a competent authority or court.
Read about the Madras High Court’s decision in Rakesh Beniyal Vs ITO case, where the court dismissed a writ petition challenging an assessment order related to a disputed bank account opening and transactions, stating that such disputed facts are not suitable for Article 226 proceedings.
Explore the Bombay High Court’s judgment in Vodafone India Ltd Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax case, emphasizing the importance of thoughtful consideration before approving assessment reopening under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act.
