S. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Assessing Officer must first make inquiry with regard to information available after obtaining sanction from competent authority and thereafter, issue initial notice under clause (b) of section 148A calling for explanation on basis of which to decide whether case fit for reopening-Assessing Officer had issued initial notice under clause (b) as if inquiry is to be conducted under clause (a)-Notice bad in law.[S 148, 148A(b),148A(d), Art. 226]

S. 148A: Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Search and seizure-Assessment of third person-Limitation-Order under section 148A(d) and proceedings pursuant to second notice issued under section 148 beyond period of limitation invalid and set aside.[S. 132, 147, 148, 148A(b),148A(d), 153C, Art. 226]

S. 148A: Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Faceless assessment-Jurisdictional officer-Inquiry by Assessing Officer and passing of order on prima facie conclusion that it is fit case for reopening-Not available in Scheme-Scheme is unambiguous and plain in language-If Scheme applied to new procedure for reassessment, it would amount to alteration by adding procedure not intended by Legislature Notices for reassessment issued by jurisdictional Assessing Officer and not faceless Assessing Officer-Valid. [S. 120, 124, 127, 130, 144B, 148, 148A, 151A Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020-e-Assessment of Income Escaping Assessment Scheme, 2022-Notification No. 18 of 2022 dated 29-3-2022.]

S. 148A: Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Faceless assessment-Jurisdictional officer-manner Notices issued and proceedings conducted by the jurisdictional officer-Not sustainable-Direction that the order was subject to the outcome of special leave petitions preferred by the Department against the decision of the courts on the same issue before the Supreme Court.[S. 147, 148, 148A(b) 148A(d),151A, Art. 226]

S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Capital gains-Capital asset or stock-in-trade-Transferred to subsidiary-Exemption granted-Withdrawal of exemption-Proceedings under section 155(7B) to be within a period of four years from the end of previous relevant year in which conversion was made Held, initiation of proceedings beyond four years would be barred by limitation-Reassessment notice and order disposing the objection quashed.[S. 45, 47(iv), 47A, 144B, 148, 154, 155(7B), Art. 226]

S. 139: Return of income-Central Board of Direct Taxes-Circulars-Compulsory audit of accounts-Circular extending “specified date” for submission of audit report-Due date-CBDT directed to issue circular to extend “due date” for filing of return. [S. 44AB, 119, Art. 226]

S. 132B : Application of seized or requisitioned assets-Seizure of jewellery and gold-Stipulated time of 120 days is directory and not mandatory. Consequence of non-release is liability to pay interest. No automatic release of seized articles on expiry of time limit [S. 132, 132B(1)(i), proviso, (4). Art.226]

S. 119: Central Board of Direct Taxes-Circular-Power vested in authority goes with duty to exercise it to advance the purpose for granting such power-Duty to exercise power in aid of enforcement of public or private right of citizen-Genuine hardship-Failure to file Form 10IC-tax New concessional rate of tax at 22 per cent-Delay ought to have been condoned. [S.115BAA(2), 119(2)(b), Art. 226]

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Avoidance of tax-International transaction-Most appropriate method “Any other method” Recourse only if none of other methods considered most appropriate method-Transfer Pricing Officer not recording reasons for not following transactional net margin method-Nor discussing applicability of any other method-Not justified in adopting residual method-Res judicata not applicable-But principle of consistency important.[S.92CA,260A, R. 10AB 10AB(1)(f)]

S.80IA: Industrial undertakings-Enterprises engaged in infrastructure development-Not a contractor but a developer of infrastructure facilities-Eligible for deduction-SLP dismissed on account of delay of 358 days and also on merit.[S.80IA(4), Art. 136]