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...
Under the Act, the provisions related to income escaping assessment provide that if the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year, he may assess or reassess or recompute the total income for such year under section 147 of the Act by issuing a […]
Finance Bill 2021- Paradigm Shift In The Provisions Relating To Income Tax Search And Seizure Assessments And Income Tax Settlement Commission Introduction:- The Hon’ble Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman has presented the Union Budget 2021 of India on the 1st of February, 2021. Budget 2021 is aimed at reviving an economy that plunged into deepest […]
Sanjay Duggal Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) ITAT observed that In some of the cases the approval was granted on the date the request was made for approval by the A.O. In all those cases merely draft assessment order and the assessment folders were available with the A.O. For example in the case of Shri Sanjay […]
Tanvir Collections Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) Absence of satisfaction of AO of searched person must for other person without which jurisdiction assumed under 153C is invalid It is palpable that the AO of Shri B.K. Dhingra, Smt. Poonam Dhingra and M/s Madhusudan Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., did not record any satisfaction that some money, […]
PCIT Vs S.R.Trust (Madras High Court) Conclusion: In the absence of any incriminating documents or evidence discovered during the course of search under Section 132 in the case of searched person against the assessee, the jurisdiction under the provisions of Section 153C could not be assumed. Held: Assessee was a charitable trust registered under Section […]
The issue under consideration is whether to acquire jurisdiction under section 153C is it require that the seized documents must be incriminating and must relate to the assessment year whose assessment were sought to be reopened?
Hitesh Ashok Vaswani Vs DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad) In the present case the search information received from the investigation wing was used to form the reason to believe by the AO but without applying the mind. Thus the reasons were merely recorded on the borrowed satisfaction by the AO. The source for all the conclusions was […]
Where assessee did not produce any material, despite opportunity being afforded to show that the amount seized during the search, did not belong to it but belonged to some other person as claimed by it; the addition made in the hands of the assessee on account of cash seized during the search would be sustainable.
The issue under consideration is whether the issuing notice u/s 153C to the person other than person against whom search is initiated, but without submitting satisfaction note is justified in law?
The issue under consideration is whether the assessee is correct in stating that cognizance taken under section 153A of the Act is illegal at the end of the A.O.?
