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. 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)

S. 148 : Reassessment-Notice-Jurisdiction assumed on issue of notice not on its service-Order is valid-Address shown on Permanent Account Number database at relevant time mentioned in memorandum of appeal and even replies furnished during appellate proceedings-No satisfactory explanation for claim that notice was sent to wrong address. [S. 147, 149, R. 127]

ACIT v. Kamlesh Kumar Sahu (2022) 96 ITR 53 (SN) (Jabalpur) (Trib)

S. 148 : Reassessment-Notice-Reason should be based on tangible material-Sanction for notice accorded mechanically-Notice was not valid. [S. 147, 151]

Lakhmi Chand Tejoo Mal v. ACIT (2022)96 ITR 612 (Delhi) (Trib)

S. 148 : Reassessment-Notice–Death of assessee-Department was not informed of death of assessee even though notice was received by family members-Assessment order not invalid on ground of notice had been served on deceased-No return filed–Failure to issue notice under Section 143(2) does not render reassessment proceedings invalid-Substantial cash deposited in Bank Account of assessee-Sufficient for formation of belief-Addition is confirmed. [S. 68, 143(2), 147]

Ashoksinh Indrasinh Kumpavat v. ITO (2022) 99 ITR 19 (SMC) (SN.)(Ahd) (Trib)

S. 148 : Reassessment-Notice-Proceedings for rectification of mistake dropped after considering reply-Reassessment proceedings cannot be held to be invalid. [S. 147, 154]

Karnataka State Beverages Corporation Ltd. v. ACIT (2022) 99 ITR 325 (Bang) (Trib)

S. 148 : Reassessment-Notice-Minor-Form No 26AS-No reasons were recorded by the Assessing Officer Ward 6(3), who has issued the notice-Notice was not issued by the Jurisdictional officer-Objection was not raised in the course of assessment proceedings-After participating in the assessment proceedings and completion of assessment the jurisdictional issue cannot be raised-Non application of mind by the sanctioning Authority-Reassessment was quashed. [S. 4, 5, 64(IA), 124(3), 133(6), 147, 151, Contract Act, 1872, S. 11]

Apoorva Sharma v. ITO (2022) 218 TTJ 959/ 216 DTR 300 (Jaipur)(Trib)