Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Dhirendra Bhupendra Sanghvi v. ACIT [2023]458 ITR 326 / 294 Taxman 13 / 151 taxmann.com 541 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 148 : Reassessment–Notice-Dead person-Issuing a notice to a correct person is not merely a procedural requirement but a condition precedent for a notice to be valid in law – Order null and void. [S. 148A(b) 148A(d)), Art. 226]

Shahana Nayak v. ITO [2023] 151 taxmann.com 482 (Bom)(HC)

S. 148 : Reassessment–Notice-Un-explained investment -Wrongly stating that return was filed in terms of section 119(2)(b)- Exparte order making addition as income from undisclosed sources – Order was set aside – Directed to treat the return filed in terms of section 148 of the Act. [S. 69, 119(2)(b), 144, 147, 292B, Art. 226]

Lok Developers Registered Partnership Firm v. Dy. CIT (2023) 455 ITR 399 / 149 taxmann.com 93 (Bom)(HC)

S. 148 : Reassessment – Service of notice – Primary email id – Notice issued on the secondary notice – Failure to participate in the proceedings – Service of the notice is not valid – Reassessment was quashed. [S. 144, 144B, 147, 282, Rule 127, Art. 226]

D.K. Realty India (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT [2023] 148 taxmann.com 468 / 292 Taxman 328 (Bom)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment –With in four years- Advance – Change of opinion – Notice and order disposing the objection was quashed. [S. 69A 148, Art. 226]

B.U. Bhandari Autolines (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT [2023] 456 ITR 56/ 292 Taxman 195/ 331 CTR 240 (Bom)(HC)/Editorial : SLP of Revenue is dismissed on account of delay of 354 days as well as on merits . ACIT v. B. U. Bhandari Autolines Pvt. Ltd. (2025)472 ITR 1 /171 taxmann.com 130 (SC)

S. 147 : Reassessment–With in four years- Accommodation entries – Shell company – Deposit demonetized cash- Sales Borrowed satisfaction – Not independently applied the mind- Reassessment notice and order disposing the objection was quashed. [S. 69A, 143(1), 148, Art. 226]

PCIT v. NESCO Ltd. [2023] 291 Taxman 286 (Bom)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment – With in four years – No tangible material – Business expenditure -Compensation- Provision for compensation – Pending for settlement – Reassessment is held to be bad in law. [S. 37(1), 145, 148, Art. 226]

Clear Media (India) (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT [2023] 150 taxmann.com 52 / 293 Taxman 108 (Bom)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment–With in four years- Depreciation–Change of opinion –Depreciation–License fee–No new information– Reassessment notice and order disposing the objection was quashed. [S. 32, 35AAB, 148, Art. 226]

Mumbai Postal Employees Co-operative Credit Society Ltd. v. ITO [2023] 149 taxmann.com 94 / 292 Taxman 492 (Bom)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment–After the expiry of four years- Co-operative Society-Deduction allowed- Change of opinion–Reassessment notice and order disposing the objection was quashed. [S. 80P(2)(1), 80P(2)(d), 148, 226]

Tahnee Heights CHS Ltd. v. ITO [2023] 458 ITR 585 /147 taxmann.com 335 / 292 Taxman 315 (Bom)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment–After the expiry of four years – Co-operative societies – Reopening of assessment being a mere change of opinion was not justified–Reassessment notice and order disposing the objection was quashed. [S. 80P, 148, Art. 226]

Saurashtra Infra and Power Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2023) 451 ITR 51 / 149 taxmann.com 388 (Bom)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment–After the expiry of four years- Infrastructure Development-Audit objection -No failure to disclose material facts–Notice of reassessment based on Audit objection–Reassessment notice and order disposing of the objection was quashed. [S. 80IA(4), 115JB, 148, Art. 226]