S. 153A : Assessment-Search or requisition-Undisclosed Income-Bogus Purchases from Hawala or Bogus dealers-Assessee not in possession of evidences/bills-Average ratio of bogus purchase to turnover 1%-Bogus purchase estimation on that basis-Additions justified.[S. 132]
Dy. CIT v. Wind World India Ltd. (2022) 98 ITR 22 (Mum.)(Trib)
Digest of case laws
Online digest of latest case laws
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. 153 : Assessment-Reassessment-Limitation-Order was passed beyond the period of nine months-Order is bad in law.[S. 147, 148, 153(2)]
Mohd. Arif v. ITO (2022) 219 TTJ 485 / 217 DTR 104 (Raipur)(Trib)S. 153 : Assessment-Limitation-Threshold monetary limit of Rs. 5 crores not available to characterise transactions with associated enterprises as specified domestic transactions-Order is nullity and barred by limitation. [S. 92BA, 92CA(3)]
Garg Acrylics Ltd. v. Add. CIT (2022)96 ITR 61 (SN) (Delhi)(Trib)S. 153 : Assessment-Reassessment-Limitation-Ante-dated order-Direction of Addl. CIT-AO in April, 2015 and signed by pre-dating it as 30th March, 2015-Assessment order was time barred and quashed. [S. 147, 148, 153(2)]
Dy. CIT v. Clarion Technologies (P) Ltd. (2022) 216 TTJ 23 (UO) (Pune)(Trib)S. 151 : Reassessment-Sanction for issue of notice-After the expiry of four years-Sanction of Prescribed Authority-Failure by Assessing Officer to obtain approval of prescribed authority Qua “Reasons to believe”–Reassessment Invalid-Assessment is liable to be quashed. [S. 147 148]
Ramesh Kumar v. ITO (2022) 95 ITR 79/ 218 TTJ 749 (Amritsar)(Trib)S. 151 : Reassessment-Sanction for issue of notice-After the expiry of four years-Valid sanction-Sanction received from JCIT instead of PCIT/CCIT/CIT-Law in force on the date of issue of notice is applicable-Reassessment notice is valid-Source of deposit not substantiated-Addition as cash credit affirmed. [S. 68, 148, 151(2)]
Shyam Gidwani v. ITO (2022)98 ITR 665 (Jaipur) (Trib)S. 148 : Reassessment-Notice-Improper manner of service of notice and non service of notice to the relevant database address of the assessee-Order was quashed. [S. 144, 282, 292BB, Order V, rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908]
Sohan Lal Bhatoya v. ITO (2022) 220 TTJ 1155 / 219 DTR 233(Amritsar)(Trib)S. 148 : Reassessment-Notice-Recorded reasons not supplied–Assessment order was quashed. [S. 147, 68, 69C 133A]
Beekay Enterprises v. ACIT (2022) 95 ITR 21 (Pune)(Trib)S. 148 : Reassessment-Notice-Recorded reasons not supplied-Reassessment is not valid [S. 147]
ACIT v. Beekay Enterprises (2022)95 ITR 21 (SN(Pune) (Trib)S. 148 : Reassessment-Notice-Validity-Incorrect bank transaction in the form of bank deposits-Wrong facts recorded for formation of belief that income has escaped assessment-Reassessment was quashed [S. 147, 148]
Sourav Bakshi v. ITO (2022) 95 ITR 279 (Amritsar)(Trib)