{"id":47464,"date":"2024-10-31T09:18:36","date_gmt":"2024-10-31T03:48:36","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/vijayakumar-v-itd-2024465-itr-396-madhc\/"},"modified":"2024-10-31T09:18:36","modified_gmt":"2024-10-31T03:48:36","slug":"vijayakumar-v-itd-2024465-itr-396-madhc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/vijayakumar-v-itd-2024465-itr-396-madhc\/","title":{"rendered":"Vijayakumar v. ITD (2024)465 ITR 396 (Mad)(HC)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Allowing the petition the Court held that the Department had proceeded ex parte because the assessee had not replied to the notice under section\u00a0148A(b)\u00a0or participated in the reassessment proceedings under section\u00a0147. The aggregate deposits had been taken into consideration. The assessee had contended that the debits from the bank account were not taken into consideration and that if such debits were considered, the alleged escapement of income would be less than the prescribed minimum threshold of Rs. 50 lakhs. Since the assessee could not contest the matter on the merits earlier, the assessee should be provided an opportunity of hearing. Thereafter a fresh order could be passed. The assessment order and the notice of penalty were set aside and the matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer. Matter remanded. (AY.2015-16)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Ex-parte order-If debits considered escapement of  income would be within threshold limit of  Rs. 50 Lakhs-Opportunity of hearing is not given-Assessment order and notices are quashed and set aside.  [S. 147, 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), Art. 226] <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-47464","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-cly","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/47464","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=47464"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/47464\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":47465,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/47464\/revisions\/47465"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=47464"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=47464"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=47464"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}