Income Tax : The guide provides detailed rules for VDA transfers executed through exchanges, brokers, and payment gateways. It identifies who i...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai quashes reassessment (AY 13-14, 14-15) as AO missed the Rajeev Bansal-mandated "surviving limitation." S. 149 prevails...
Income Tax : Analysis of the Rajeev Bansal Supreme Court ruling on reassessment approvals, clarifying complexities in Section 151 and its impac...
Income Tax : Explore key court rulings on reassessment under Section 148 post-2021 amendments, covering procedural changes, taxpayer rights, an...
Company Law : Overview of Section 149 of the Companies Act, 2013: Board composition, women directors, resident and independent directors' roles,...
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 : Gujarat HC quashed Section 148 reassessment as it was issued beyond Section 149 limitation, holding Section 152(3) applies to sear...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai quashed a Section 148 notice issued after the limitation under the first proviso to Section 149, holding the reassessm...
Income Tax : Receipts earned by a German resident individual from rendering managerial, consultancy and business development services outside I...
Income Tax : The Madras High Court held that delayed transfer of seized documents under Section 132(9A) did not invalidate notices issued under...
Income Tax : The Tribunal ruled that an Investigation Wing report alone cannot justify an addition under Section 68 without independent verific...
Custom Duty : Learn how to file and process Bill of Entry amendments at Jawahar Lal Nehru Custom House. Get insights on self-approval and office...
The Tribunal ruled that once the original notice itself is jurisdictionally invalid, later compliance with section 148A is irrelevant. Foundational defects cannot be remedied procedurally.
The Tribunal held that profit estimation cannot rest on conjectures or lump-sum allegations. In absence of identified bogus purchases or factual basis, the entire addition was deleted.
The High Court held that reassessment notices issued after excluding periods mandated by Supreme Court rulings were time-barred, rendering subsequent proceedings invalid
ITAT Kolkata held that ownership, transfer, and transaction resulting into profit from business or profession and capital gain in respect of joint development agreement needs more verification. Accordingly, matter remanded back for fresh adjudication.
The Tribunal held that approval by an incompetent authority under Section 151(ii) invalidates a reassessment issued after three years. The notice and consequential order were declared void for lack of jurisdiction.
The tribunal held that reassessment beyond three years is invalid when alleged escaped income is below Rs. 50 lakh. Notices issued contrary to section 149 after the 2021 amendments were quashed for lack of jurisdiction.
The dispute centered on whether a reassessment notice was time-barred and sanctioned by the correct authority. The Tribunal held that the reply period under section 148A must be excluded, bringing the notice within three years and validating the sanction.
The issue was whether a reassessment notice issued after the prescribed time limit was valid. The Tribunal held that notices for the relevant year issued after the cut-off date were barred by limitation, rendering the reassessment void.
The court examined whether reassessment for one year could be based on information from another year. It held that absence of foundational facts for the relevant year invalidates the notice.
The Revenue argued for exclusion of the 148A show-cause period to justify approval. The Tribunal rejected this, holding that the exclusion proviso applies only prospectively from Finance Act 2023.
