Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Revathi Equipment Ltd. v. ACIT (2021) 435 ITR 543 / 282 Taxman 232/ 204 DTR 313/ 322 CTR 703 (Mad.)(HC).Editorial : Order of single jude set aside , Revathi Equipment Ltd. v .ACIT (2022)443 ITR 262 (Mad) (HC )

S. 147 : Reassessment-Non-compere fee-Failure to disclose material facts-Notice for reassessment is held to be valid. [S. 148, Art. 226]

Garden Silk Mills Ltd. v. ACIT (2021) 435 ITR 351 / 204 DTR 129 / 322 CTR 66/ 281 Taxman 484 (Guj.)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment-Deduction allowed in part during original assessment-Pendency of appeal before Appellate Tribunal-Reassessment proceedings cannot be resorted to in respect of income which is the subject matter of an appeal, reference or revision. [S. 80IA, 148, 253, Art. 226]

Deepak Wadhwa v. ACIT (2021) 435 ITR 699 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment-With in four years-Notice alleging failure to file the return-Acknowledgement for return filed was produced-Approval was not taken-Notice and order rejecting objections was Set aside- Cost of Rs 20,00 , was imposed on the Revenue . [S. 139, 148, Art. 226]

Cemach Machineries Ltd. v. ITO (2021) 435 ITR 306 (Guj.)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment-With in four years-Bogus transaction-Accommodation entries-Assessing Officer verifying material and deciding information was true-Notice is valid. [S. 133(6), 148, Art. 226]

Cavinkare Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy.CIT (2021) 435 ITR 396/ 282 Taxman 69 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment-With in four years-Change of opinion-Commission paid Chairman-Cum-Managing Director-CIT (A) allowing the claim in subsequent assessment year which has became final-Reassessment is held to be impermissible. [S. 36(1)(ii), 148]

Alliance Fibres Ltd. v. ACIT (2021) 435 ITR 264 / 280 Taxman 242 (Guj.)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment-Information from Investigation wing-No independent opinion-Cannot travel beyond reasons recorded-Notice was quashed. [S. 68, 148, Art. 226]

Aircel Cellular Limited v. Dy. CIT (2021) 435 ITR 660 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment-With in four years-Under assessment of income-Misinterpretation of provision-Notice valid-High Court cannot consider sufficiency of reason. [S. 80IA, 148, Art. 226]

Viresh Hemani v. ITO (2021) 435 ITR 376 (Orissa)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Objections not been disposed of-Invalid approval-Approval of Joint Commissioner instead of Principal Chief Commissioner-Reassessment is held to be bad in law. [S. 148, 151, Art. 226]

Seshasayee Paper and Boards Ltd. v. ACIT (2021) 435 ITR 625 (Mad.)(HC), affirmed , ACIT v. Seshasayee Paper and Board Ltd. (2023)455 ITR 291/334 ITR 517 /148 taxmann.com 432 (Mad)( HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Book profit-Bad and doubtful debts-Subsequent retrospective amendments-No failure to disclose material facts-Reassessment notice is held to be not valid. [S. 115JB, 148, Art. 226]

Garvit Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO (2021)435 ITR 737 / 203 DTR 34 (2022)) 325 CTR 530 (Guj.)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Finding by Investigation Wing-Bogus transaction-Accommodation entries-No true disclosure of facts-Issue of notice is valid. [S. 148, 149, Art. 226]