{"id":48600,"date":"2024-12-01T10:21:23","date_gmt":"2024-12-01T04:51:23","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/ratan-bej-v-pcit-2024467-itr-288-jharkhandhc\/"},"modified":"2026-02-09T06:50:07","modified_gmt":"2026-02-09T01:20:07","slug":"ratan-bej-v-pcit-2024467-itr-288-jharkhandhc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/ratan-bej-v-pcit-2024467-itr-288-jharkhandhc\/","title":{"rendered":"Ratan Bej v. PCIT (2024)467 ITR 288\/ (2025) 344 CTR  92 \/ 248 DTR  127   (Jharkhand)(HC)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Allowing the petition the Court held that the Assessing Officer ought to have considered the objections raised by the assessee in response to the notice under section\u00a0148A(b)\u00a0and should have disposed of it as mandated under section\u00a0148A(c). Court also held that\u00a0 \u00a0since the income escaping assessment was less than Rs. 50 lakhs, section\u00a0149(1)(b)\u00a0could not have been invoked. The assessee and his brother were joint owners of the inherited property with respective share of 50 per cent. each and both being joint vendors were entitled to equal share of the consideration amount of Rs. 32,68,000 each and this had been accepted by the Revenue. The reassessment proceeding initiated by the Department was barred by limitation and was beyond jurisdiction. Hence, the entire enquiry proceeding under section\u00a0148A, the order under section\u00a0148A(d)\u00a0and the notice under section\u00a0148\u00a0were quashed.(AY. 2016-17)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Monetary limitation-Sold by Co-owners-Less than Rs.50 lakhs-Notice and order is set aside.[S. 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), 149(1) (b), 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-48600","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-cDS","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48600","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=48600"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48600\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":58434,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48600\/revisions\/58434"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=48600"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=48600"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=48600"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}