S. 147: Reassessment – After the expiry of four years – Accommodation entries –Shell companies – Borrowed satisfaction – Information from investigation wing -Natural justice – Search – Survey-No failure to disclose material facts –Without the application of mind – Opportunity for cross-examination was not provided – Reassessment was quashed. ( Tribunal has passed 359 pages order dealing with all issues on reassessment proceedings .) [ S.131, 132.132(4), 133(6), 133A, 148, 153A, 153C ]

S. 144 : Best judgment assessment – One time settlement – Order passed in the years 2016 – High Court set aside the ex- parte order – Directed the Assessing Officer provide all the evidences and recorded reasons -Directed the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer to pass a reasoned order .[ S. 147 , 148,179, 264 , Art . 226 ]

S. 254(1): Appellate Tribunal- Powers- Ex parte order – Search – Alleged Accommodation entry provider – 32,000+ beneficiaries- Shell companies -Alleged Money Laundering – Direction issued by the Tribunal to AO to intimate/report to SEBI, ED, MCA and ROC regarding details of money laundering activities-Directed the Assessing officer to share information about all beneficiaries within 90 days . [S. 132, 150, Prevention of Money- Laundering Act, 2002; 11, Art. 226]

S. 153C: Assessment – Income of any other person – Search- Business of financing- Loan not repaid- Treated as bad-debts- Search on the premises of debtors- Subsequently, notice issued to- Assessing Officer is not justified in assuming jurisdiction where assessment has not been abated where no incriminating material was found- Best judgement assessment- Notice under section 143(2) is mandatory -Reassessment – Change of opinion- Issues dealt with during original assessment-Full and true disclosure of information-No new tangible material – Reassessment is bad in law- No failure to comply with notice under section. 142 – Best judgement assessment is bad in law – CBDT Circular -Binding on Revenue – Assessment order issued without bearing Document Identification Number (DIN)- Order is invalid. [S.36(1)(vii) 119, 132,133A, 143(2)(2) 144, 147 , 148, 153A, Art. 226]

Interpretation of taxing statute – If statute provides for a thing to be done in a particular manner, then it has to be done in that manner and in no other manner – Reassessment – Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice – Faceless Jurisdiction of income -tax authorities. [ S. 148A, Art , 226 ]

S. 148A: Reassessment – Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice – Faceless Jurisdiction of income -tax authorities – e- Assessment Scheme, 2022- It is mandatory for Revenue to conduct /initiate proceedings to reassessment in a faceless manner – Concurrent jurisdiction -Reassessment notice was issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer and not by Faceless Assessing Officer – CBDT notification – Finance Act , 2021 -Procedure adopted by the Revenue is contravention of the statute – When the initiation of the proceedings itself was procedurally wrong, the subsequent orders also gets nullified automatically- Interpretation of taxing statute – If statute provides for a thing to be done in a particular manner, then it has to be done in that manner and in no other manner . [ S.119, 124, 130(1), 130(2), 144B, 147, 148, 148A (d), 151A, e-assessment of Income Escaping Assessment Scheme 2022- , 2(1)b),3, Art ,142, 226 ]

S.115O: Tax on distributed profits of domestic companies – Tax on distributed income to share holders – Buy back of shares –Capital reduction – Deemed dividend – The consideration paid by the assessee to its shareholders for purchase of its own shares was liable to tax as deemed dividend u/s.2(22)(d) of the Act, and alternatively, u/s.2(22)(a) of the Act, and consequently, the assessee company was liable for payment of Dividend Distribution Tax (in short “DDT”) u/s.115-O of the Act. – DTAA -India – Mauritius . [ S. 2(22)(a),2(22)(d), 10(34), 46A, 115O , Companies Act 1956 , S. 77A, 100, 102, 104 , 391 to 393 , Companies Act , 2013 , 68 , Art. 13 .]