Income Tax : Judicial rulings clarify that satisfaction for initiating action against other persons in search cases must be recorded promptly. ...
Income Tax : CBDT issues new compounding guidelines simplifying process, eligibility, charges, and procedures under the Income-tax Act from Oct...
Income Tax : CBDT's new Compounding of Offence Guidelines (2024) simplify the process but maintain strict compliance rules. Learn about eligibi...
Income Tax : AY 2015-16 assessment under Section 153C held time-barred. Judicial rulings confirm six-year limit runs from handing over of seize...
Income Tax : Learn why a consolidated satisfaction note for multiple assessment years is legally invalid under Section 153C of the Income Tax A...
Income Tax : Learn about the new block assessment provisions for cases involving searches under section 132 and requisitions under section 132A...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that reopening under Section 147 was invalid where it was based on third-party search material. It ruled that Se...
Income Tax : The issue was whether a notice granting less than the statutory minimum time is valid. The tribunal held that giving less than 7 d...
Income Tax : The Court held that a 21-month delay in recording the satisfaction note violates the requirement of immediacy. It ruled that such ...
Income Tax : Reassessment proceedings was invalid for a notice issued beyond three years without the sanction of the prescribed higher authorit...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that unsigned excel sheets without supporting evidence cannot justify additions. It ruled that absence of corrob...
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...
It is well settled proposition of law that the apprehension, howsoever strong, cannot substitute material evidences. A.O. was not justified in treating part of liabilities as unproved on presumptions, surmises and conjectures
K.S. Nutrition and Food Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) Assessee, inter alia, submitted that the Assessing Officer was not justified in assuming jurisdiction u/s. 153C of the Act in the present case, as the assessment year under consideration does not come within the compass of the block of six assessment years, if it is […]
Neesa Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad) Since the proceedings u/s. 153C of the Act were initiated in the present case on the basis of documents which we have held above neither belonged to the assessee nor were incriminating in nature, they were not sufficient for assuming jurisdiction u/s. 153C of the Act. The […]
The pertinent assertion of learned counsel Shri Gargieya is that the assessing authority could not have adopted the procedure provided under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act for reopening the assessment of the petitioner because such action was taken on the basis of facts revealed to the assessing authority during the assessment of DRA Group at Ahmedabad and the proceedings, if any, would have to be conducted under Section 153A read with Section 153C of the Income Tax Act.
Addition cannot be made on the basis of mere confidential information submitted before Settlement Commission without incriminating material found in search and seizure to support addition.
Ashok Kumar Tyagi Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) ITAT held that the addition of agricultural income as income from other sources was not based on any incriminating/seized material found as a result of search. Even, the disallowance of loss claimed against house property income is also not with reference to any seized material. It is a […]
PCIT Vs Vikas Telecom Ltd (Delhi High Court) In this case the learned Assessing Officer while farming the assessment order has not referred to any seized documents belonging to the assessee found during the course of search proceedings. In the remand proceedings the learned Assessing Officer has also submitted that no any incriminating materials have […]
Since no fresh information was collected by AO or no information had come to the notice of AO in normal course, other than the information collected during the course of search from searched person therefore, as provided under sections 153A and 153C, search assessments was required to be made under section 153A or section 153C, but not under section 147.
If the party who is seeking condonation of delay has not acted in malafide manner and reasons explained are factually correct then the Court should be liberal in construing the sufficient cause and lean in favour of such party.
Bajrang Tea Manufacturing Company Private Limited Vs Union of India (Calcutta High Court) I am of the view that a very short issue, according to me, involved in these writ petition is as to whether before passing the aforesaid impugned assessment orders, the objections/representations made by the petitioners against the initiation of impugned proceedings under […]
