-
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.
-
What are the consequences if Notice u/s 148 is issued before approval under section 151(1)? ITAT Ahmedabad passed the order on 4 June, 2021. in the case of OMPRAKASH KANAYALAL SHAH vs. ITO Section 147,148,151(1). https://www.bpmundraca.com/it-cases-243-2021/
-
Consequences when the Assessing Officer was not specific as to on what basis the Assessing Officer has the reason to believe that the income of the assessee has escaped assessment. Answer was given in the case of DUGGAL ESTATES PVT. LTD. & ANR. vs. ITO ITAT DELHI, May 24, 2021, Section 147, 148 AY 2009-10. https://www.bpmundraca.com/it-cases-241-2021/
-
The question in the present case is as to whether the information received from the investigation wing/search team would constitute ‘reason to believe’ empowering the Assessing Officer to reopen the assessment u/s 147/148. Answer is given by ITAT Ahmedabad on 12/11/2020 in the case of Hitesh Ashok Vaswani Vs DCIT. https://www.bpmundraca.com/it-cases-240-2021/
-
Section 68 Cash deposits in the bank and AO made the addition u/s 68 instead of u/s 69, and hence the addition made by the AO is unsustainable.DIRISALA BALA MURALI vs. ITO. ITAT VISHAKAPATNAM on Jul 29, 2020. https://www.bpmundraca.com/it-cases-232-2021/
-
Consequences of absence of the notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act before framing the assessment order? Answer order liable to to be quashed. RAM NIWAS JAIN vs.ITO. ITAT DELHI on 07-Jan-2021. Section 148: Consequences of granting approval by CIT in a mechanical manner by putting only “Yes”. Answer order liable to to be quashed. RAM NIWAS JAIN vs.ITO. ITAT DELHI on 07-Jan-2021.
-
क्या होगा जब पुन: कर निर्धारण के लिए धारा 148 का नोटिस गलत जगह भेजकर आईटीओ रिअसेसमेंट कर दे। 6 नवंबर 2020 को आईटीआई बेंगलुरु ने DIVYA S RAO vs. आईटीओ