Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020

S. 4: Filing of declaration-Pending revision-A revision application under section 264 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, filed with a request for condonation of delay, is considered ‘pending’ for the purposes of the DTVSV Act until it is disposed of by the CIT-An AO cannot reject the declaration on the basis that the revision is time-barred-The Assessing Officer was directed to process declaration of assessee and pass such order as required in accordance with law. [S. 2, Income-tax Act, 1961, S. 264, Art. 226]

Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015

S. 50 : Punishment for failure to furnish information about foreign asset-Stay of proceedings-Prosecution is premature when based on an assessment order against which an appeal is pending before the CIT(A)-High Court directed the revenue not to proceed further on the basis of the show-cause notice until the next date of hearing, thereby granting an interim stay [S.51 Income-tax Act, 1961, 276C]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Merger of orders-Revisional jurisdiction cannot be exercised on an issue which has been considered and decided by the Tribunal on appeal. [S. 80IA, 80IB, 271(1)(c)]

S. 148 : Reassessment-Notice-Notice based on a closed tax evasion petition and non-actionable information is invalid.[S. 147, Art. 226]

S. 147 : Reassessment-Audit objection-Assessing Officer to form independent belief; reopening cannot be based merely on dictates of revenue audit. [S. 92CA, 148, Art. 226]

S. 147: Reassessment-Change of opinion –Capital gains Reopening to treat capital gains as business income invalid where issue was considered in original assessment-Reopening also invalid where same issue was dropped in revision proceedings. [S. 28(i), 45, 148, 263]

S. 147: Reassessment-Change of opinion –Non-compete fee-Where an issue was specifically examined during original assessment through a query, reopening on the same issue constitutes an invalid change of opinion, even if the assessment order is silent on that point. [S. 37(1), 148, Art. 226]

S. 147: Reassessment-If income forming basis of reopening notice is not assessed, Assessing Officer cannot independently assess other escaped income subsequently noticed. [S.147 Expln. 3, 148, Art. 226]

S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Depreciation-Rate of depreciation-Computer software-Where depreciation on computer software was allowed at 60 per cent in the original scrutiny assessment, reopening the assessment after four years to restrict the rate to 25 per cent was held invalid as it was based on a mere change of opinion, there being no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose material facts. [S. 143(3), 148, Art. 226]

S. 147 : Reassessment-After expiry of four years-Change of opinion –Interest on capital work in progress-Reopening based on material already on record-No failure by assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts-Notice quashed. [S. 36(1)(iii), 143(3), 148, Art. 226]