148

(→ for subcategory see right ) (for subcategory scroll Below)

Q Validity of 148 notice when the assessment for the same assessment year has not concluded yet? IN THE DELHI HIGH COURT DCM Shriram Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT, W.P.(C) 6627/2022 & CM APPL.20136/2022 on dated 10 May, 2022
Question: Whether Notice u/s 148 dated 31.3.2021 emailed /uploaded on portal after 31.3.2021 is time barred? Answer: Yes time barred. Notice is quashed. To read the order kindly click the link
Consequences when reassessment is based on a reconsideration of material already available on record at the time of the original assessment proceedings? The BOMBAY HIGH COURT passed the order in the case of Infinity.Com financial securities Ltd. v. ACIT on 20 December, 2021. Section 147,148, 143(3)
Q.Consequences when the Notice u/s 148 issued on amalgamating entity which ceases to exist upon the approved scheme of amalgamation despite informed to the Ld. AO. ITAT Delhi passed the order on this issue on 8 November, 2021. Section 148
Incriminating material of the assessee found in the search of 3rd party then the assessment or reassessment proceeding of the assessee under which section 148 or 153C of the Income Tax Act? ITAT Delhi Bench again confirmed on Sep 17, 2021. in the case of CITY LIFE PROJECTS PVT. LTD. vs. ITO
No interference is required to be made in the issue of notice under old provisions of Section 148 of the Income Tax Act extended uptill 30th day of June, 2021. The petition of the assessee is dismissed by Chhattisgarh High Court on 23/08/2021 in the case of Palak Khatuja Vs Union Of India
Section 147, 148, 143(3). If reopening within a period of four years of assessment u/s 143(3) then there is no bar for reopening of assessment If there is certain non-disclosure. But If reopening beyond four years for assessment already in u/s 143(3) then It must be established that the assessee has not disclosed fully and truly all material evidence with an intention to escape from the payment of tax. motive or intention on the part of the assessee for such non-disclosure is also a material ground. It is a case where the reopening beyond four years of assessment u/s 143(3) and the order of approval, which was validly granted, was produced before the Assessing Officer at the time of scrutiny and the Assessing Officer also accepted the approval order and granted exemption. Thus, the reason stated in the impugned proceedings that the assessee committed a mistake cannot be accepted. M/S.Kone Elevators (India) Pvt. … vs ACIT Madras High Court … on 16 June, 2021
Consequences when AO reopen the case only on the basis of valuation report or when no addition is made on account of reason recorded? ITAT CHANDIGARH passed the order in the case of FATEH HOMES PVT. LTD. vs. ITO ON 16.6.2021. IN FAVOUR OF ASSESSEE. IT-CASES-246-2021.
Section 147,148, 151 Consequences when the A.O. mentioned wrong Section, wrong facts in the reasons for reopening of the assessment and acted in a mechanical manner without application of mind. ITAT Delhi in the case of Maheshwari Roller Flour Mills Pvt … vs Ito on 17 December, 2020 AY 2009-10. In favour of assessee. ITA.No.4257/Del./2019.
Section 147,148, 151. Consequences when the Ld. AO failed to provide the complete Annexures which are the basis for reopening ? The ITAT Delhi passed the order on 15 January, 2020 in the case of Behat Holdings Ltd., New Delhi vs Ito Ward-4(3), New Delhi Order in the favour of the assessee. ITA.No.8066/Del./2019.