Income Tax : Delhi HC rules in PCIT Vs Pavitra Realcon Pvt. Ltd., ITA 579/2018, emphasizing the need for corroborative evidence in tax assessme...
Income Tax : Explore the intricacies of invoking Section 153C of the Income Tax Act, as clarified by the Delhi High Court, regarding the posses...
Income Tax : Delve into the provisions of Income Tax Act Sections 153A & 153C, governing assessments after search or requisition. Learn from co...
Income Tax : Learn about Section 147 to 153 Income Escaping Assessment and Reopening of Cases Under Income Tax Act, 1961. Get guidance on the p...
CA, CS, CMA : Discover the major changes in ITR forms for FY 2023-24 (AY 2024-2025). Highlights include new sections for retirement benefit acco...
Income Tax : Learn about the new block assessment provisions for cases involving searches under section 132 and requisitions under section 132A...
Income Tax : ITAT Pune remands the case of Suhas Maruti Dhankude for re-adjudication due to non-adjudication of jurisdictional grounds and fail...
Income Tax : Notice under section 148 was issued upon assessee by AO for reassessing the cash deposit as undisclosed income, following approval...
Income Tax : Delhi High Court held that in case of search, block period of ten years for search assessment, would not be attracted in case the ...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held that in respect of assessment proceedings u/s. 153C of the Income Tax Act, block period of six assessment years ha...
Income Tax : Gujarat High Court dismisses Revenue’s appeal as unsigned excel sheet lacks corroboration in S. 153C Income Tax Act proceedings....
Income Tax : Central Government has decided to extend the time limits to 30th June, 2021 in the following cases where the time limit was earlie...
Income Tax : Availability of Miscellaneous Functionalities related to ‘Selection of Case of Search Year’ and ‘Relevant Search...
There is no dispute that the search was conducted in the previous year relevant to the assessment year under consideration therefore the provisions of Section 153C are not applicable for the assessment year under consideration however, the mention of this Section in the order is only a mistake which is covered under the provisions of Section 292BB of the Act.
Since satisfaction note was recorded by AO of searched person who also happened to be AO of assessee (other person) as well to effect that seized documents belonged to assessee, issuance of notice under section 153C on basis of such note was justified.
The purpose of initiating proceedings under Section 153C of the Act, the seized documents had to be shown to belong to the other person and not merely pertaining to such other person. The change brought about in this regard in Section 153 C of the Act by way of amendment has been given prospective effect from 1st June 2015.
Supraja’s Sandy Lane Bar & Restaurant Vs. ACIT (ITAT Visakhapatnam) As per 153C of Income Tax Act for invoking jurisdiction, there must be incriminating material found and seized during the course of search in form of money, bullion, jewellery or the evidences indicating the inflation of e expenditure or undisclosed investments or suppression of Income.etc. […]
There is, therefore, nothing to contradict the categorical finding of the ITAT that the document which formed the main basis for initiation of the proceedings under Section 153C of the Act does not belong to the Assessee. One of the principal conditions for attracting Section 153C of the Act is, therefore, not fulfilled in the present case.
In a recent ruling, the Hyderabad ITAT ruled that non- enclosure of audit report to the return of income would not attract penalty under section 271B of the Income Tax Act.
Under the provisions of section 292B, certain acts are not to be treated as invalid by reason of mistake or defect or omission either in the return of income, assessment, notice, summons or other proceedings. In other words, notice cannot be invalidated by reason of any mistake such as one occurred in the present case i.e. mentioning section 153A instead of 153C.
The only mistake on the part of AO was in mentioning section 153A, instead of section 153C. If this mistake was not allowed to be cured, the very purpose and object of enacting section 292B would be defeated as impugned notice in substance and effect, was in conformity with or according to the intent and purpose of the Act.
These are cross appeals by the assessee and the Revenue emanating out of the orders of learned CIT(Appeals)-III, Nagpur for assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10 respectively. Since the issues are connected and the appeals were heard together
Requirement of Section 153C of the Act cannot be ignored at the alter of suspicion. The Revenue has to strictly comply with Section 153C of the Act. We are of the view that non satisfaction of the condition precedent viz. the seized document must belong to the respondent – assessee is a jurisdictional issue and non satisfaction thereof would make the entire proceedings taken thereunder null and void.
