Income Tax : A guide to India's block assessment tax provisions from the Finance Act 2024. Understand pending assessments, undisclosed income, ...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai quashed reassessment after finding no Section 143(2) notice and that the AO issued a final order disguised as a draft ...
Income Tax : Punjab & Haryana HC upheld Section 153C notices, holding the satisfaction note was not belated and limitation objections should fi...
Income Tax : Gujarat High Court upheld deletion of the Section 271D penalty, holding that absence of recorded satisfaction in the assessment or...
Income Tax : Bombay High Court held Section 153C notices invalid as the satisfaction note was not recorded immediately after the searched perso...
Income Tax : The tribunal reversed the CIT(A)’s decision for wrongly quashing assessment due to lack of notice under Section 143(2). It held ...
Income Tax : CIRCULAR NO. 24/2015 Several High Courts have held that the provisions of section 153C of the Act are substantially similar/pari-m...
ITAT Mumbai quashed reassessment after finding no Section 143(2) notice and that the AO issued a final order disguised as a draft under Section 144C.
Punjab & Haryana HC upheld Section 153C notices, holding the satisfaction note was not belated and limitation objections should first be raised before the AO.
Gujarat High Court upheld deletion of the Section 271D penalty, holding that absence of recorded satisfaction in the assessment order made the penalty unsustainable.
Bombay High Court held Section 153C notices invalid as the satisfaction note was not recorded immediately after the searched person’s assessment.
The tribunal reversed the CIT(A)’s decision for wrongly quashing assessment due to lack of notice under Section 143(2). It held that Section 263 proceedings are a continuation of original assessment.
The Court held that recording satisfaction after a delay of nine months was not immediate as required by law. It upheld quashing of assessment proceedings and deletion of undisclosed income addition.
The ITAT held that absence of a valid notice under Section 143(2) is a jurisdictional defect. Since the notice was not properly issued by the competent officer, the entire assessment was declared void ab initio.
The Tribunal examined whether prior approval under Section 153D was granted after due application of mind. It held that mechanical and routine approval invalidates the assessment, rendering the search assessment void.
The High Court held that jewellery seized during a search cannot be retained once tax liability is fully settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. Continued detention after issuance of Form-5 was declared illegal.
While search proceedings were still pending, the Court permitted release of seized jewellery and cash after petitioners deposited amounts against possible tax demand. No view was taken on merits of explanations.
