Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


CIT v. Madhuri Sharma (Smt.) (2024) 336 CTR 362 (Pat) (HC)

S. 158BE : Block assessment-Time limit-No statement was taken of assessee-No substantial question of law. [S. 132,132A, 158BC, 260A]

Satyendra Kumar v. CIT (2024) 336 CTR 619 (Pat) (HC)

S. 158BC : Block assessment-Search-Undisclosed income-Disclosure was made in the return filed after search action-Income from HUF-Return was not filed-Addition is justified-No substantial question of law.[S. 132, 158BB, 260A]

CIT v. Goldstone Cements Ltd. (2024) 336 CTR 448 (Gauhati)(HC)

S. 153A: Assessment-Search-Electronic device in the form of a hard drive extracted from the computer of the assessee-Reappreciation of evidence-No substantial question of law.[S. 68, 132, 260A]

Indian Renewable Energy Development Agency Ltd. v. PCIT (2024) 336 CTR 651 /470 ITR 374 (Delhi) (HC)

S. 153 : Assessment-Reassessment-Limitation-Time barred assessment-Refund-Remand by Tribunal-Assessing Officer is directed to accept the return of income as available on record and pass the consequential orders. [S. 139, 153(2A), 153(3), 263 , Art. 226 ]

Nitin Sharma v. PCIT (2024) 336 CTR 126 (MP)(HC)

S. 149 : Reassessment-Time limit for notice-Search-There is no restriction of time period for issuance of notice under S. 148-Petition is dismissed. [S.132, 132A, 148, 149(1), 153A, 153C, Art. 226]

Bijendra Singh v. PCIT (2024) 336 CTR 819 (Raj) (HC)

S. 149 : Reassessment-Time limit for notice-Amount is less than 50 lakhs-Notice issued beyond three years-Order is barred by limitation. [S.148, 148A(b), 148A(d), Art. 226]

Chaturbhuj Gattani v. ITO (2024) 336 CTR 369 (Raj) (HC) Saroj Gattani v. ITO (2024) 336 CTR 369 (Raj) (HC)

S. 148A: Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Supply of information-Information/description has been given to the assessee-Writ petition is dismissed. [S. 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), Art.226]

Asamannoor Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. v. ITO (2024) 336 CTR 631 (Ker)(HC) Editorial : Affirmed by Division Bench, ITO v. Asamannoor Service Co-operative Bank Ltd (2024)160 taxmann.com 681 / 336 CTR 625 (Ker) (HC)

S. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Principle of natural justice-Opportunity of hearing-Order and notice is set aside.[S. 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), Art. 226]

ITO v. Asamannoor Service Co-operative Bank Ltd (2024)160 taxmann.com 681 / 336 CTR 625 (Ker) (HC) Editorial : Asamannoor Service Co-operative Bank Ltd v. ITO (2024) 336 CTR 631 (Ker)(HC) is affirmed.

S. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Show cause notice-Principle of natural justice-Service of show cause notice by itself did not tantamount to a discharge of obligation to provide assessee with an opportunity of being heard-Opportunity to be effective must include a right to a personal hearing as well-Order of Single Judge is affirmed. [S. 148A(b), 148A(d), 148, Art. 226]

Ananda Bag Tea Company Ltd. v. UOI(2024) 336 CTR 827/ 234 DTR 236 (Cal)(HC) Editorial : Ananda Bag Tea Company Ltd. v. UOI (2024)160 taxmann.com 675 / (2024) 336 CTR 824 (Cal) (HC), Division Bench affirmed the order of Single Bench.

S. 148A: Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Alternative remedy-Finding of fact-Alternative remedy-Writ petition is dismissed. [S. 148A(b), 148A(d), 148, Art. 226]