S. 148A: Reassessment-Limitation–Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-TOLA overrides Income-tax Act to extent of relaxing time limit for issue of reassessment notice which fell for completion from 20-3-2020 to 31-3-2021, till 30-6-2021-Section 3(1) of TOLA relaxes time limit for compliance with actions that fall for completion from 20 March 2020 to 31 March 2021 and TOLA will accordingly extend time limit for grant of sanction by authority specified under section 151-Entire time allowed to assessee to respond to show cause notice has to be excluded for computing period of limitation and thus, period from date of issuance of deemed notices till supply of relevant information and material by Assessing Officers to assessees in terms of directions issued by this Court in UOI v. Ashish Agarwal (2022) 286 Taxman 183/ 444 ITR 1 (SC) has to be excluded from computation of period of limitation-In case of section 151 of new regime if time limit of three years from end of an assessment year falls between 20 March 2020 and 31 March 2021, then specified authority under section 151(i) has an extended time till 30 June 2021 to grant approval-In case of section 151 of old regime, if time limit of four years from end of an assessment year falls between 20 March 2020 and 31 March 2021, then specified authority under section 151(2) has time till 31 March 2021 to grant approval..[S. 148, 149(1)(b), 151, Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020, S. 3(1)]

S. 147 : Reassessment-Directions of higher authorities-Evident from record that Assessing Officer had passed order for reassessment under influence of his superiors-Reassessment is rightly quashed by the Tribunal. [S. 68, 132(9A),132A, 148 260A]

S. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel-Transfer pricing-Draft assessment order-Eligible assessee-No estoppel against the law-AO have to assess the original return in terms of S. 143(1) or other relevant provisions of the IT Act and make an appropriate assessment order-Order is set aside. [S.143(1), 144C(15)(b), Art. 226]

S. 144 : Best judgment assessment-Undisclosed income-Machinery shown in the balance sheet-Failure to explain the source of investment-Addition as undisclosed income is held to be justified. [S.69, 119, 143(2), 260A]

S. 143(3) : Assessment-Alternative remedy-Writ-Disputed question of fact cannot be adjudicated in writ petition-Remedy open to the assessee is to approach the appellate forum-Order of single judge dismissing the writ is affirmed. [S. 250, 154(1) Art. 226]

S. 143(3): Assessment-Income from undisclosed sources-Investment in immovable property-Books of account-Matter is remanded to the Assessing Officer-Failure to comply with notices, directed to pay cost of Rs.10000, to the Adyar Cancer Institute Chennai-Addition on the basis of stamp valuation is affirmed. [S. 56(2) (viib), 56(2) (x) (b)(B), 69A, Art. 226]

S. 139 : Return of income-Condonation of delay-Reasonable cause Illness of spouse of chartered accountant-Delay is properly explained-Delay is condoned-Order of PCIT is rejecting the application is seta side [S.119(2)(b), Art. 226]

S. 132 : Search and seizure-Reason to believe-Single Judge failed to examine contentions of malafides, highhandedness and oppressive behavior during the course of search-Matter is remanded for reconsideration-Necessary to examine if there has been acquiescence on the part of assessee in which event the non furnishing of reasons pales in to insignificance ; enquiry was not made by the single judge-Denial of timely medical treatment would constitute infringement of the right to life guaranteed under Art. 21 of the Constitution of India-Matter is remanded for reconsideration–Recording of satisfaction-Single judge has erred in generalizing the challenge to notices under section 153C issued to 12 entities on the basis of satisfaction note for a single entity nor the single judge applied the principle in CIT v. Sinhagad Technical Education Society (2017) 397 ITR 344/297 CTR 441. 156 DTR 161 (SC), wherein the court held that the seized material must be pertain to relevant assessments years in question-Matter remanded for reconsideration-Transfer of case-Non communication of orders-It may be necessary to examine if there has been acquienscence on the part of the assessee in which event the non furnishing of reasons pales in to insignificance ; above enquiry was apparently not made by the single judge, matter is remanded for reconsideration-Handing over of seized material-Incriminating material-Order of the single Judge in sofar as it finds that even in the absence of seized material being handed over to the AO, the AO is under a mandate to issue notice under S.153A is required to be re-examined in the light of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in PCIT v. Ahisar Buildwel (P) Ltd (2023)454 ITR 212/ 332 CTR 729/ 225 DTR 497 (SC)-Matter remanded.[S. 127,132(1) 132(9A), 153A, 153C, 281B, 292B, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Rule 112, Art. 20, 21,32, 226, 265]

S. 132 : Search and seizure-Validity-Reason to believe-Recorded reason does not disclose any information-Search action is under quashed and set aside.[R. 112(2),Art. 226]

S. 80G : Donation-No failure to meet aims and objects-Exemption was granted for earlier years-No specific finding recorded by Commissioner(E) that assessee had failed to meet out its aims and objects and that funds received by assessee-society had been utilised for any profit, personal gains or any other purposes-Order passed by Commissioner(E) is set aside and matter is remanded back for reconsideration. [S. 12, 12A,12AA, 800G(5)(vi), Art. 226, Form No 10G]