Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Shyam Gidwani v. ITO (2022)98 ITR 665 (Jaipur) (Trib)

S. 151 : Reassessment-Sanction for issue of notice-After the expiry of four years-Valid sanction-Sanction received from JCIT instead of PCIT/CCIT/CIT-Law in force on the date of issue of notice is applicable-Reassessment notice is valid-Source of deposit not substantiated-Addition as cash credit affirmed. [S. 68, 148, 151(2)]

Sohan Lal Bhatoya v. ITO (2022) 220 TTJ 1155 / 219 DTR 233(Amritsar)(Trib)

S. 148 : Reassessment-Notice-Improper manner of service of notice and non service of notice to the relevant database address of the assessee-Order was quashed. [S. 144, 282, 292BB, Order V, rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908]

Beekay Enterprises v. ACIT (2022) 95 ITR 21 (Pune)(Trib)

S. 148 : Reassessment-Notice-Recorded reasons not supplied–Assessment order was quashed. [S. 147, 68, 69C 133A]

ACIT v. Beekay Enterprises (2022)95 ITR 21 (SN(Pune) (Trib)

S. 148 : Reassessment-Notice-Recorded reasons not supplied-Reassessment is not valid [S. 147]

Sourav Bakshi v. ITO (2022) 95 ITR 279 (Amritsar)(Trib)

S. 148 : Reassessment-Notice-Validity-Incorrect bank transaction in the form of bank deposits-Wrong facts recorded for formation of belief that income has escaped assessment-Reassessment was quashed [S. 147, 148]

ACIT v. Kamlesh Kumar Sahu (2022) 96 ITR 53 (SN) (Jabalpur) (Trib)

S. 148 : Reassessment-Notice-Jurisdiction assumed on issue of notice not on its service-Order is valid-Address shown on Permanent Account Number database at relevant time mentioned in memorandum of appeal and even replies furnished during appellate proceedings-No satisfactory explanation for claim that notice was sent to wrong address. [S. 147, 149, R. 127]

Lakhmi Chand Tejoo Mal v. ACIT (2022)96 ITR 612 (Delhi) (Trib)

S. 148 : Reassessment-Notice-Reason should be based on tangible material-Sanction for notice accorded mechanically-Notice was not valid. [S. 147, 151]

Ashoksinh Indrasinh Kumpavat v. ITO (2022) 99 ITR 19 (SMC) (SN.)(Ahd) (Trib)

S. 148 : Reassessment-Notice–Death of assessee-Department was not informed of death of assessee even though notice was received by family members-Assessment order not invalid on ground of notice had been served on deceased-No return filed–Failure to issue notice under Section 143(2) does not render reassessment proceedings invalid-Substantial cash deposited in Bank Account of assessee-Sufficient for formation of belief-Addition is confirmed. [S. 68, 143(2), 147]

Karnataka State Beverages Corporation Ltd. v. ACIT (2022) 99 ITR 325 (Bang) (Trib)

S. 148 : Reassessment-Notice-Proceedings for rectification of mistake dropped after considering reply-Reassessment proceedings cannot be held to be invalid. [S. 147, 154]

Apoorva Sharma v. ITO (2022) 218 TTJ 959/ 216 DTR 300 (Jaipur)(Trib)

S. 148 : Reassessment-Notice-Minor-Form No 26AS-No reasons were recorded by the Assessing Officer Ward 6(3), who has issued the notice-Notice was not issued by the Jurisdictional officer-Objection was not raised in the course of assessment proceedings-After participating in the assessment proceedings and completion of assessment the jurisdictional issue cannot be raised-Non application of mind by the sanctioning Authority-Reassessment was quashed. [S. 4, 5, 64(IA), 124(3), 133(6), 147, 151, Contract Act, 1872, S. 11]