Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


K. A. Rauf v. CIT (2022) 446 ITR 421 / 215 DTR 13/ 328 CTR 920 (Ker.)(HC)

S. 153A : Assessment-Search or requisition-Undisclosed income-Amounts credited to employees account-Admission by employees that the amount belong to the assessee-Peak and gross profit theory-Not accepted-Addition is held to be justified. [S. 132, 133A]

Urmila v. ITO (2022) 446 ITR 511/ 218 DTR 60 / 328 CTR 734(Raj.)(HC)/Surya Prakash v.ITO 2022)446 ITR 511/ 218 DTR 60 / 328 CTR 734 (Raj)(HC)/Vaijanti Dadhich v .ITO ( 2022)446 ITR 511/ 218 DTR 60 / 328 CTR 734 (Raj)(HC)

S. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Request for adjournment to file response not granted-Assessing authority obliged to decide dispute in respect of a mount involved in transaction with reference to material submitted by assessee. [S. 148, 149, Art. 226]

Maharaja Edifice Pvt. Ltd. v. UOI (2022) 446 ITR 508 / 289 Taxman 468(Cal.)(HC)

S. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Violation of principle of natural justice-Not furnished full information-Matter remanded. [S. 147, 148, Art. 226]

Parveen Amin Bhathara (Smt.) v. ITO (2022)446 ITR 201 / 218 DTR 51/ 328 CTR 831 (Mad.)(HC) Editorial : Sadhana Tolasaria v. ITO (2021) 18 ITR-OL 88 (Mad.)(HC), decision of Single judge reversed.

S. 148 : Reassessment-Notice-Limitation-Doctrine of substantial compliance-Mere signing of notice is not sufficient-Date of issue would be date on which notice was served on assessee-Notice dated 31-3-2018 served on assessee through E-Mail on 18-4-2018 for AY. 2011-12-Notice barred by limitation. [S. 147, 149, 282, R. 127, Art. 226]

Dishnet Wireless Ltd. v. ACIT (OSD) (2022) 446 ITR 227 / 215 DTR 337 / 288 Taxman 197 /(2023) 330 CTR 567(Mad.)(HC)

S. 148 : Reassessment-Notice-Proceedings under Insolvency And Bankruptcy Code, 2016-Not a bar for issue of notice of Reassessment. [S. 147, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, S. 10, 30(6), 31, Art. 226]

Bengal Tiger Line (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy.CIT (2022) 446 ITR 331 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 148 : Reassessment-Notice-No procedural irregularity-Notice issued and objections raised-Notice valid-Writ is not maintainable there is no violation of law or principle of natural justice. [S. 147, Art. 226]

Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Ltd. v. NEAC (2022) 446 ITR 325 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment-Order passed after considering the objections-Assessment order was passed-Writ is not maintainable. [S. 148, Art. 226]

Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel Education Society v. ITO (2022) 446 ITR 278 (Guj.)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment-No tangible material-Notice not valid. [S. 148, Art. 226]

Rajesh Jayantilal Patel v. Dy. CIT (2022)446 ITR 313/ 216 DTR 137 (Guj.)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment-Survey-Information from investigation wing-Live link-Sufficiency of material cannot be considered at stage of notice-Notice valid. [S. 133A ,148, 151, 153C, Art. 226]

Lakshman Prasad Agarwal v. UOI (2022) 446 ITR 692 / 215 DTR 349/ 327 CTR 320 (Cal.)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment-Participated in the proceedings–Order of reassessment is valid. [S. 142(1), 148, Art.226]