Reopening of assessment beyond three years requires sanction ...

Tax reassessment notice invalid due to improper sanction & income below Rs. 50L threshold.

Case Laws Income Tax

August 30, 2024

Reopening of assessment beyond three years requires sanction from Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, whereas the assessee obtained sanction from Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, rendering it invalid as per the Siemens Financial Services case. The alleged escaped income of Rs. 9,00,000/- is below Rs. 50,00,000/-, barring the notice u/s 148 due to limitation u/s 149(1)(b), as held in Ganesh Dass Khanna case, where the extended ten-year period applies only for serious tax evasion cases with concealment of income above Rs. 50 lakhs. Consequently, the impugned notice issued u/s 148 is without jurisdiction and set aside, making the resultant reassessment order null and void, decided in favor of the assessee.

View Source

← Previous Next →

Reopening of assessment beyond three years requires sanction ...

Tax reassessment notice invalid due to improper sanction & income below Rs. 50L threshold.

Case Laws Income Tax

August 30, 2024

You may also like:

Reopening of assessment u/s 147 was invalid due to lack of valid sanction as required u/s 151. The competent authority must independently apply its mind based on...

The court held that the Joint Assessing Officer (JAO) lacked jurisdiction to issue notices u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act for reassessment, as per Section 151A read with...

Reassessment proceedings were held invalid due to lack of proper jurisdiction by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax while issuing the notice u/s 148. The...

Reassessment proceedings invalidated due to improper sanctioning authority. Sanction accorded by Principal Commissioner instead of Principal Chief Commissioner as...

Section 143(2) is a mandatory requirement, and failure to comply with it renders the reassessment proceedings invalid. The High Court has consistently held that Section...

The High Court ruled that the Joint Assistant Commissioner (JAO) lacked jurisdiction to issue notices u/s 148 for reassessment of income escaping assessment. The notices...

Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - Fresh sanction under Section 151 - For a moment, even if accept Revenue’s contention that the present proceedings are continuation of...

Validity of assessment framed u/s 143(3) by Non- jurisdictional ITO - Jurisdiction of AO based on income threshold / monetary limits as per the return of income - The...

Reopening of assessment under old regime - scope of new regime - scope of TOLA - In this detailed judgement, the Court found that the notice issued under Section 148 was...

Sanction by Principal Commissioner of Income Tax instead of Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax u/s 151(ii) for reassessment proceedings beyond three years from...

Monetary limit for appeal to the High Court - The appeal involves a total sum of Rs. 60 lakhs, consisting of the redemption fine and penalty. Citing Instructions dated...

Reassessment action initiated based on Section 148 notice and subsequent Section 148A(b) notice violated the First Proviso to Section 149(1) and was barred by the...

As per the instruction the notice was to be issued by the Income-tax Officer but the notice was issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax. Therefore in view of...

The Appellate Tribunal addressed the issue of notice u/s 143(2) issued by a non-jurisdictional AO. The initial notice was issued by an ITO who did not have valid...

Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - The Tribunal found the reassessment proceedings to be invalid due to the non-application of mind by the AO and lack of valid approval...

Quick Updates: