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 – Service of notice – Return submitted giving new address — Notice sent to old address — No proper service of notice — Notice and reassessment proceedings not valid – Sanction for issue of notice – After expiry of three years – Approval of Principal Commissioner (PCIT) is not valid – Approval is required from Principal Chief Commissioner (PCCIT) – Order was quashed. [S. 147, 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), 149(1)(a), 151(iii), Art. 226]

Chitra Supekar (Mrs.) v. ITO [2023] 149 taxmann.com 26 / 292 Taxman 511 / 453 ITR 530 / 332 CTR 374 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 151 : Reassessment-Sanction for issue of notice-After the expiry of four years – Satisfaction recorded by Joint Commissioner–Notice and order disposing the objection was quashed. [S. 147, 148, Art. 226]

Thirdware Solution Ltd. v. DCIT [2023] 146 taxmann.com 364 (Bom)(HC)/Editorial : Notice is issued in SLP filed by the Revenue, Dy. CIT v. Thirdware Solution Ltd. (2024) 297 Taxman 8 (SC)

S. 148A : Reassessment – Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice – Jurisdiction – Part of cause of action had accrued within territorial jurisdiction of Bombay High Court – Bombay High Court has the jurisdiction to entertain the Writ petition- Interim relief was granted. [S. 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), Art. 226]

HSTN Acquisition (FII) Ltd. v. DCIT [2023] 147 taxmann.com 226 / 330 CTR 453 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice – After three years from the end of relevant assessment year – Service of notice without the signature of Assessing Officer digitally or manually-Notice invalid – Order and notice was quashed and set aside. [S. 147, 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), Art. 14, 226]

Prakash Krishnavtar Bhardwaj v. ITO (2023) 451 ITR 27 / 331 CTR 64 / 150 taxmann.com 60 / 293 Taxman 132 (Bom)(HC)

S. 148A : Reassessment – Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice – Notice issued in name of deceased assessee- Notice and order quashed and set aside. [S. 147, 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), Art. 226]

Prakash Tatoba Toraskar v. ITO (2023) 452 ITR 59 / 151 taxmann.com 366 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 148A: Reassessment – Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice – Assessee must be furnished material on the basis of which initial notice was issued- Notice was quashed. [S. 69C, 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), Art. 226]

Anurag Gupta v. ITO [2023] 150 taxmann.com 99 / 454 ITR 326 / 332 CTR 811 (Bom)(HC)

S. 148 : Reassessment-Notice-Two Permanent Account Numbers —Earlier Permanent Account Number was abended – Notices issued in earlier Permanent Account Number not responded – [ 144, 147, 148, 156, 271B, 271F, 274, Art. 226]

Bhavna Steel v. ITO [2023] 152 taxmann.com 218 / 454 ITR 670/ 335 CTR 1074 (Bom)(HC)

S. 148 : Reassessment –Notice – Recorded reason was not provided – Order of assessment is bad in law-Faceless Assessment Scheme who shall proceed in the matter after providing to the Petitioner the reasons recorded for reopening. The proceedings be completed preferably within a period of three months from today. [S. 144B, 147, Art. 226]

Rajesh Poddar v. ITO ( 2023] 152 taxmann.com 98 (Bom)(HC)

S. 148 : Reassessment–Notice–Search and Seizure–Third party premises-Satisfaction note-Failure to furnish documents- Assessment order quashed and set aside – Matter was remanded back for adjudication afresh. [S. 131, 132, 147, 151, Art. 14, 226]

Sahebrao Deshmukh Co-op. Bank Ltd. v. ACIT [2023] 149 taxmann.com 248 / 292 Taxman 258 / 455 ITR 92 (Bom)(HC)

S. 148 : Reassessment –Notice – Amalgamation- Company ceased to exist- Succession to business otherwise than on death -Non existing company – Amalgamation – PAN in name of non -Existent company remained active – Notice issued was quashed. [S. 148, 170, Art. 226]

CLSA India (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT [2023] 149 taxmann.com 380 (Bom)(HC)