The High Court set aside reassessment proceedings after holding that notices issued by a Jurisdictional Assessing Officer violate the faceless assessment mandate under Section 151A.
The Tribunal remanded the case after finding that reassessment and appellate orders were passed ex parte without examining key issues on transfer, valuation, and cost, directing a fresh assessment with opportunity of hearing.
The High Court held that once the Revenue accepted partial relief on bogus purchases, further reduction by the ITAT involved only estimation and raised no substantial question of law.
The tribunal ruled that ignoring a valid adjournment request vitiates ex-parte assessment and appellate orders. The is that fair opportunity is mandatory before deciding tax disputes.
ITAT Raipur remands bogus purchase disallowance for a rice miller, awaiting the High Court’s ruling. The case will be reconsidered de novo following legal principles once HC decides.
Revenue challenged deletions of additions in a scrutiny assessment, highlighting procedural lapses under Rule 46A. Tribunal remitted the matter for fresh adjudication considering additional evidence filed by the assessee.
The Tribunal upheld CIT(A)’s deletion of Rs. 10,00,059/- as the addition was based solely on uncorroborated third-party information. No primary evidence linked the assessee to the alleged accommodation entries.
Tribunal rules that procedural delay in filing Form 10B does not bar exemption under sections 11 and 12, following Supreme Court guidance on procedural lapses.
ITAT quashed a reassessment under section 147 as the AO failed to issue the mandatory notice under section 143(2), rendering the assessment legally invalid.
The ITAT Hyderabad held that section 144C cannot override outer time limits under section 153. Assessments passed beyond statutory deadlines are void, reinforcing strict compliance with limitation periods.
