This Digest of case laws is prepared by KSA Legal and AIFTP from judgements reported in BCAJ, CTR, DTR, ITD, ITR, ITR (Trib), Chamber's Journal, SOT, Taxman, TTJ, BCAJ, ACAJ, www.itatonline.org and other journals
Click here to download the pdf versions of the Digest of case laws
S. 147 : Reassessment-Reasons–Additional ground-Jurisdiction-Addition made in reassessment proceedings with regard to head for which there was no notice-Reassessment is bad in law. [S. 148]
Escorts Finance Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2022)96 ITR 45 (SN)(Delhi)(Trib)
S. 147: Reassessment-Finding of Commissioner (Appeals) recorded in perfunctory manner-Order not sustainable-Matter restored to Commissioner (Appeals) for adjudication de novo on merits. [S. 148]
Electronica Machine Tools Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2022)96 ITR 20 (SN) (Pune) (Trib)
S. 147 : Reassessment-Change of opinion-Industrial undertakings-Sale of surplus power-Reassessment is not valid. [S. 80IA(4)(iv)]
Dy. CIT v. Sunflag Iron And Steel Co. Ltd. (2022) 96 ITR 9 (SN.) (Nag) (Trib)
S. 147 : Reassessment-With in four years-No failure of disclosure of facts-Reassessment order is bad in law. [S. 148]
ACIT v. AbirInfrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (2022)97 ITR 245 (Hyd.) (Trib)
S. 147 : Reassessment-Assessment reopened on certain specific grounds-No addition was made on which the reassessment notice was issued-Additions made on other grounds-Reassessment is bad in law. [S. 143(3)]
Satyawan v. ITO (2022)97 ITR 16 (SN) (Delhi) (Trib)
S. 147: Reassessment-No new tangible material to reopen assessment-Reassessment quashed. [S. 148]
Sanjit Jitendranath Biswas v. ITO (2022)97 ITR 14 (SN) (Surat) (Trib)
S. 147: Reassessment Notice-Failure to issue notice-Reassessment void-Issue of notice prior to filing return of no avail. [S. 143(2) 148, 292BB]
Bhupendra K. Pathak v. ITO (2022)97 ITR 28 (SN)/ 218 TTJ 11 / 216 DTR 283 (SMC) (Pune) (Trib)
S. 147 : Reassessment-No new material-Cash credits-Income from undisclosed source-Assessee borrowed money from friends and relatives-No evidence to show the receipts as bogus-Reassessment was quashed. [S.68, 148]
Sanjit Jitendranath Biswas v. ITO (2022)97 ITR 14 (SN) (Surat) (Trib)
S. 147 : Reassessment-Unsecured loans-Accommodation entries-In reasons recorded, name of assessee and person from whom bogus accommodation entry different-Name of party and Permanent Account Number in information received also different-Reassessment not valid-Addition as cash credit was deleted. [S. 68, 133(6), 148]
Golden Central Foods Products P. Ltd. v. ITO(2022)100 ITR 49 (SN)(Delhi) (Trib)