Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Pankajbhai Jaysukhlal Shah v .ACIT ( 2019 ) 110 taxmann.com 51 / (2020)425 ITR 70/ 185 DTR 306/ 312 CTR 300 (Guj) (HC)/ Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed , Add .CIT v. Panjajbhai Jaysuklal Shah ( 2020) 275 Taxman 99 (SC)

S.147: Reassessment —Officer recording reasons and issuing notice must be the jurisdictional Assessing Officer — Reasons recorded by jurisdictional Assessing Officer – E. assessment Scheme – Notice issued by officer who did not have jurisdiction over assessee — Defect not curable- Notice and consequential proceedings and order invalid [ S.148 , 292B ]

Vedanta Ltd v. ACIT (2020) 426 ITR 59/ 185 DTR 249/ 312 CTR 481/ 270 Taxman 277 (Delhi)( HC)

S.147: Reassessment-After the expiry of four years- Financial transaction accepted as genuine during original assessment — Subsequent information from income-tax investigation wing that transaction was with name-Lender — No disclosure of true facts — Notice of reassessment is held to be valid- The Court also directed the assessee to pay cost of Rs. 1 lakhs to be paid to The Delhi High Court Advocates Welfare Trust with in within four weeks of the receipt of the [ S.148 Art , 226 ]

Royal Infrastructure v. Dy. CIT (2020) 425 ITR 491 / (2019) 265 Taxman 103 ( Mag.) (Guj)(HC). Editorial: SLP of Revenue is dismissed due to low tax effect ,Dy. CIT v. Royal Infrastructure (2023) 294 Taxman 432 (SC)

S.147: Reassessment — After the expiry of four years- No failure to disclose material facts – Form of return not requiring specification of persons mentioned in Section- Assessing Officer not examining the clauses – Reassessment notice is held to be not valid [ S.80IB(10)( e ) & (f) , 148,Art , 226 ]

B. Kasi Viswanathan v. ITO (2020)425 ITR 538 /187 DTR 467/ 317 CTR 993/ 274 Taxman 173 (Mad)(HC)

S.147: Reassessment-After the expiry of four years- No failure to disclose material facts – Long term capital gains – Notice held to be not valid . [ S. 54, 148 Art , 226 ]

Kakaria Housing and Infrastructure Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2020)425 ITR 103 (Guj) (HC)

S.147: Reassessment-After the expiry of four years- Audit objection – Not accepted by the Assessing Officer –Borrowed satisfaction – No failure to disclose material facts – Notice is held to be bad in law [ S.148 , Art .226 ]

International Flavours and Fragrances India Pvt Ltd v. Dy. CIT (LTU) (2020)425 ITR 450 / 315 CTR 448 /191 DTR 191 (Mad) (HC)

S.147: Reassessment-After the expiry of four years- Manufacture -Change of opinion- Based on the basis of commission issued – Held to be bad in law and impermissible. [ S .2(29BA) 131ID , 80IB ,148 , Central Excise Act, 1944 S.2(f) ]

City Union Bank Ltd v. ACIT (2020) 425 ITR 475 (Mad)(HC)

S.147: Reassessment-After the expiry of four years- Primary facts disclosed — Assessing Officer not making appropriate calculation —Notice of reassessment issued without jurisdiction — Existence Of Alternate Remedy would not bar issue ow writ to quash notice [ S.14A , 148 Rule 8D ,Art , 226 ]

Asian Tubes Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2020) 425 ITR 613 (Guj)(HC)

S.147: Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-No failure to disclose material facts – Merely because the Assessing Officer did not record such acceptance in the assessment order that would not be a ground to conclude that income had escaped assessment- Reassessment notice is held to be not Valid [ S. 36(1)(iii), 40(a)(ia), 148 ]

Arun Munshaw HUF v ITO (2020) 425 ITR 79 (Guj)(HC)

S.147: Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-No failure to disclose material facts – Reassessment order is held to be not valid. [ S.148 ]

Jivraj Tea Ltd v. ACIT (2020) 426 ITR 146 (Guj) (HC)

S.147: Reassessment-After the expiry of four years- No new tangible material -Maintaining separate books of account – Notice is held to be bad in law [ S.80IA , 148 ]