Mundra House, 822-A, Shivaju Nagar, Civil Lines, jaipur-302006 9314501680, 9314501791

B.P.Mundra

मानवता से काम करें मन के सारे काम अपने आप हो जायेंगे

इस महीने के इम्पोर्टेंट काम
  • Home
  • GST
  • Cases Income tax
  • MCA
  • Subsidy
  • TDS
  • About Us
  • contact us
  • Login
    • Admin Login
    • Staff Login
    • User Login
  • Loan
  • Apply for job
  • Click Here
  • HOW TO
  • To file ITR for AY 2022-23 kindly give details (and also evidence if yes) of following
  • Categories
    • Articles
    • Authority
    • Benami Transactions (Prohibition)
    • client
    • Constitution of India
    • Finance Act 1994
    • formalities to be completed
    • GST
    • Happiness
    • HOW TO
    • Income Tax
    • Indian Evidence Act 1872
    • Job Application
    • MCA
    • Office system
    • Papers required for filing
    • Principal of mutuality
    • rajasthan public trust
    • Smile
    • Subsidy
    • work report

148

B.P.Mundra > Income Tax > Cases Income tax > 148

(→ for subcategory see right ) (for subcategory scroll Below)
  • Reassessment—Income escaping assessment -Since the sale consideration has been accepted ‎by the Department itself in the case of the purchaser no case is made out in initiating ‎proceedings under section 147 of the Act in the case of the seller of the property. This ‎amounts to approbation and reprobation, which is not permissible under the law. The ‎Department cannot blow hot and cold in the same breath, accepting the position in the case of ‎the purchaser, while calling it in question in the case of the seller, i.e., the assessee. Holding it ‎to be a mere change of opinion, the initiation of proceedings under section 147 of the Act in ‎the case of the assessee is held to be null and void. Accordingly, the initiation of proceedings ‎under section 147 of the Act, and everything pursuant to such initiation, culminating in the ‎order under appeal, are quashed.‎

  • Non-striking off of the relevant column of the show cause notice cannot be a valid reason for deletion of the penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act if responded and participated in the proceedings. hence, matter was remanded back to CIT(A) for adjudication of the appeal on merits. ITO vs. RAJAN KALIMUTHU

  • The notice issued u/s 148 in the name of the dead person is unenforceable in the eye of law.

  • अगर 148 का नोटिस समुचित रूप से सर्व नहीं हुआ है तो रीएसेसमेंट की सारी कार्यवाही रद हो जाएगी मुंबई ट्रिब्यूनल ने फैसला देते हुए कहा है कि फ्लैट नंबर या ऑफिस का नंबर सही ढंग से नहीं लिखने के या कोई भी कारण भी अगर नोटिस सर्व नहीं हुआ है तो आगे की सारी कार्यवाही रद्द मानी जाएगी

  • Unless corroborative evidence is found during course of survey, search & seizure, addition cannot be made ‎merely on statement recorded.‎

  • If any information belonging to ‎an assessee found during course of search at another party and Ld AO initiated ‎proceedings u/s 147/148 then the re-assessment proceedings passed u/s 148 ‎shall not stand and assessment framed by AO is null and void as the correct ‎course of initiation of proceedings is 153C and not u/s 147/148‎

  • For the purpose of carrying forward the loss in terms of section 72 read with ‎section 80 of the Act, in a case where search operations have been conducted ‎under section 132 of the Act, the time to file the return within the meaning of ‎section 139(3) of the Act has to be regarded as the reasonable time afforded by ‎the consequent notice under section 153A(1)(a) of the Act.‎

  • the AO’s failure to issue notice under section 143(2) after filing ITR invalidated the order ‎of reassessment. Issue of notice u/s 143(2) before filing of ITR is not compliance of provision ‎ order quashed and cannot be condoned ‎by referring to section 292BB of the Act

  • No addition in respect of share application money when names and addresses of share holders were given to AO

  • Friends, it has been held that Once Settlement Commission has completed proceedings, its order has to be considered conclusive as regards matters “stated therein” per Section 245I and reopening any proceeding in respect of matters covered in order would be barred. Any reassessment proceedings sought to be excluded from purview of “case” must be in respect of Section 148 notice sent while proceedings before Settlement Commission are ongoing. Once Settlement Commission had completed proceedings, its order had to be considered conclusive as regards matters “stated therein” per Section 245I and reopening any proceeding in respect of matters covered in order would be barred. Therefore, impugned notice issued to assessee u/s. 153C could not be sustained. Hence, impugned notice and all further proceedings quashed. It was open to the respondent/Revenue to move the Settlement Commission for appropriate relief of declaration that its previous order under Section 245D (6) is void, setting out the relevant facts and circumstances. Assessee’s petition allowed

Post navigation

← Previous 1 … 3 4 5 6 Next →

Sub Categories of 148

  • No categories