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-Beyond three years-Sanction-Specified Authority-Sanction from Principal Commissioner-Not from Principal Chief Commissioner or Principal Director General or Chief Commissioner or Director General and not under section 151(i)-Prior approval was taken from Principal Commissioner in terms of section 151(i) and not by specified authority under section 151(ii)-Order as well as notice issued under section 148 is bad in law hence quashed and set aside. [S. 148, 148A(b) 148A(d), 151 (i) 151 (ii), Art. 226]
Cipla Pharma and Life Sciences Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2024) 300 Taxman 295 (Bom.)(HC)
S. 149 : Reassessment-Time limit for notice-Assessing Officer had proceeded without jurisdiction by applying amended provisions of section 149 to case in hand when he issued notice on 25-7-2022 overlooking fact that limitation had already expired on 31-3-2020-Reopening notice issued under section 148 is quashed.[S. 148, 149(1)(b) Art. 226]
Bhoomi Viral Shah v. ITO (2024) 300 Taxman 474 (Bom.)(HC)
S. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Unexplained money-Sale consideration received in cash-Sale by Power of Attorney holder-Since a detailed adjudication on merits of information available with Assessing Officer and defence set up by assessee is not contemplated at stage of passing an order under section 148A(d)-Writ petition is dismissed.[S. 69A, 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), Power of Attorney Act, 1882, Art. 226,]
Agarwal Polysacks Ltd. v. Pr. CIT (2024) 300 Taxman 535 (Raj.)(HC)
S. 148A: Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Amounts of investments not fully disclosed in books of account-Report from District Valuation Officer (DVO)-Fixed asset and Capital WIP-Failure to apply mind-Reassessment notice and order disposing the objection is quashed.[S. 48, 69A, 148, Art. 226]
Divine Infracon (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2024) 300 Taxman 605 /242 DTR 565 (Delhi)(HC)
S. 148A: Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Unexplained investments-Violation of principle of natural justice-Order passed without considering the documents submitted by the assessee-Assessment order is set aside and matter is remanded for reconsideration from stage of reply to show cause notice cum draft assessment order.[S. 69, 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), Art. 226]
Praveen Sanjiv v. ITO (2024) 300 Taxman 33 (Mad.)(HC)
S. 148A: Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Unexplained investments-Immovable property-Added entire sale consideration-[S. 69, 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), Art. 226]
Pandian Narayanan v. NFAC (2024) 300 Taxman 559 (Mad.)(HC)
S. 148A: Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Officer who has issued the notice and heard the matter-Order is passed by the Officer who has not heard the matter-Order and notice is set aside.[S. 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), Art. 226]
Johnson Koomullil Thomas v. ITO (2024) 300 Taxman 318 (Ker)(HC)
S. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Project competition method-Method of accounting-Tax deducted at source-Mandatory to pass speaking order-Reassessment notice is bad in law-Faceless assessment-JAO had no jurisdiction to issue notice under section 148 as per requirements of section 151A read with section 144B.[S. 143(1),144B, 145, 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), 151, 151A, 194IA, Art. 226]
Sushila Sureshbabu Malge v. ITO (2024) 300 Taxman 302 /468 ITR 624 (Bom.)(HC)
S. 147 : Reassessment – After the expiry of four years – Unexplained moneys – No return is filed within time allowed – Not explained receipt of amount – Reassessment notice is held to be valid – Writ petition is dismissed. [ S.69A, 148 , Art. 226 ]
Hede Ferrominas (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT [2023] 147 taxmann.com 215 (Bom)(HC)
S. 148A: Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Sale of immovable property-Failure to reply-Reasonable cause-In view of submissions made by assessee, assessment order and penalty order is set aside on condition that assessee would remit a sum towards income tax demand, as agreed to, and submit a reply to show cause notice-Matter remanded- Petitioner is directed to deposit Rs .2,00,000 lakhs towards income -tax demand . [S. 143(3), 148, 148A(b) 148A(d),Art. 226]
Achuthan Rajarajan v. Assessment Unit, ITD (2024) 300 Taxman 241 /468 ITR 159 (Mad.)(HC)