Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram
Income Tax - Highlights / Catch Notes

Home Highlights October 2024 Year 2024 This

The Appellate Tribunal examined the validity of the reassessment ...


Tax authority's reassessment notice invalid due to lack of independent application of mind and improper reasons.

Case Laws     Income Tax

October 5, 2024

The Appellate Tribunal examined the validity of the reassessment notice issued u/s 148 and the consequent order passed u/s 147 regarding the addition made by the Assessing Officer u/s 69A, treating the long-term capital gain on the sale of shares claimed as exempt u/s 10(38) as bogus. The Tribunal held that when the reopening is based on information received from the investigation wing, the reasons must show that the Assessing Officer independently applied their mind to the information and formed their own opinion. However, in this case, the Assessing Officer merely stated the information received and their conclusion about the alleged escapement of income but did not mention what they did with the available information. The reasons must also paraphrase any investigation report forming the basis and any inquiry conducted by the Assessing Officer, along with the conclusion. If the reasons refer to any document, such document or relevant portion must be enclosed. In this case, the available information with the Assessing Officer was neither stated nor enclosed, rendering the reasons recorded not in accordance with the law. Additionally, the Assessing Officer incorrectly mentioned that the assessee did not declare the long-term capital gain in the return filed in response to the notice u/s 148, whereas the assessee had categorically shown the exempt income comprising capital gain u/s 10(38) and dividend from shares. Consequently, the notice issue.

View Source

 


 

You may also like:

  1. 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...

  2. Validity of reopening of assessment - Approval of PCIT u/s 151 - The Tribunal acknowledged the Assessee's argument regarding the mechanical approval granted by the PCIT....

  3. Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - non independent application of mind by AO - Scope of borrowed satisfaction - The Appellate Tribunal found that the reopening was solely...

  4. 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...

  5. 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...

  6. 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...

  7. 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...

  8. Reassessment u/s 147 - Sanction granted by the CIT u/s 151 - simply written “Yes I agree” which does not in any manner shed any light as to whether there was any...

  9. 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...

  10. Notices issued u/s 148 by Joint Assessing Officer (JAO) instead of Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO) were held invalid due to lack of jurisdiction, as per Section 151A...

  11. The ITAT Kolkata examined the validity of reassessment proceedings based on "reasons to believe" u/s 147. The AO's reasons lacked independent application of mind, being...

  12. The High Court examined the validity of reassessment notices issued u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, considering the sanction requirement u/s 151 and the impact of the...

  13. The court held that the notices issued u/s 133(6) and the subsequent notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act were invalid. The petitioner had filed a reply to the notice...

  14. Validity of faceless assessment challenged due to notice u/s 148 issued by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) instead of Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO), violating...

  15. Reopening of assessment was invalid as the Assessing Officer (AO) recorded reasons without independent application of mind or verification of facts. The AO merely...

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates