S. 148A: Reassessment – Limitation – Notices issued pursuant to the case of UOI v. Ashish Agarwal (2022) 444 ITR 1/ 213 DTR 217/ 326 CTR 473/ 286 Taxman / AIR 2022 SC 2781 (SC) – Notice issued on or after 01.04.2021, the period concerned is between 01.04.2021 to 30.06.2021-Relaxation Act will not apply – The law as per Finance Act, 2021 has to be followed- Notice issued for Assessment years 2013 -14 and 2014 -15 are barred by limitation – The submission that the UOI v. Ashish Agarwal (Supra) would be applicable to the cases, where such notices have been challenged before different High Courts only, were not accepted. [S. 119, 147, 148, 148A(d), 149, 151, 151A, Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation & Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020, S. 3(1), CBDT Instruction, 31-3-2021, Art. 226]

S. 148A: Reassessment – Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before the issue of notice – Limitation – Notices issued pursuant to the case of UOI v. Ashish Agarwal (2022) 444 ITR 1/ 213 DTR 217/ 326 CTR 473/ 286 Taxman / AIR 2022 SC 2781 (SC) – Notice issued on or after 01.04.2021, the period concerned is between 01.04.2021 to 30.06.2021-Relaxation Act will not apply – the law as per Finance Act, 2021 has to be followed.-CBDT Instructions No.1 of 2022 (2022) 444 ITR 43 ( St)- Interpretation Of Taxing Statutes — Strict Interpretation. [S. 119, 147, 148, 148A(d), 149, 151, 151A, Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation & Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020, S. 3(1), CBDT Notification, 31-3-2021, Art. 226]

S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Finding of fact-High Court must frame the substantial question of law-Order setting aside the order of Tribunal was quashed and set aside-Order of Tribunal was affirmed. [Interest-tax Act, 1974, S. 2(5A), 2(5B), 2(7)]

S. 201 : Deduction at source-Failure to deduct or pay-Payments to non-resident-Tribunal setting aside order holding assessee in default-High court affirming Tribunal-Question of taxability in case of recipient pending before high court-Order of High court affirmed with direction to assessing officer to proceed in matter after decision of high court in pending appeals. [S. 260A, Art. 32]

S. 179 : Private company-Liability of directors-Recovery of tax-Private company-liability primarily that of company-Assessing officer to make efforts for recovery of tax from company-Directors showing that non-recovery of tax not attributable to their gross negligence, misfeasance or breach of duty-Order against directors was quashed. [S. 156, Art. 226]

S. 153A : Assessment-Search or requisition-Sanction non application of mind-Prior approval of prescribed authority in respect of each assessment year is mandatory-Sanction of prescribed authority for 38 cases granted on single day-Assessing officer passing draft assessment order and final assessment order on same day of approval-Approval illegal and non est-Order of Tribunal was up held. [S. 132, 153D, 260A]

S. 153A : Assessment-Search or requisition-Sanction of prescribed authority-Mechanical sanction-Assessing officer passing draft assessment order and on same day approving authority granting approval for 123 assessees-impossible for a person to apply his mind on all cases for all in a single day-Approval is illegal and non est. [S. 132, 153D, 260A]

S. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Principle of natural justice-Failure to afford opportunity of hearing-Order and notices set aside-Matter remanded to assessing officer. [S. 147, 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), Art. 226]

S. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Principle of natural justice-Order passed without considering the reply-Order set aside-Matter remanded to assessing officer to consider reply and afford opportunity of hearing. [S. 147, 148A(b), 148A(d), Art. 226]

S. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Principle of natural justice-Reply was uploaded on Monday immediately after public holiday and Saturday and Sunday-Order for issue of show-cause notice without considering reply-Order passed in haste reducing procedure to nullity-A purposive interpretation needs to be given to the statutory provision-Matter was remanded-Directed the respondent to pay cost of Rs. 15000, however on request of the Departmental counsel who has assured that he will take responsibility of conveying as to what would mean by “reasonable opportunity to the assessee“-Portion of direction imposing cost on the Departmental Officer was deleted. [S. 147, 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), Art. 226]