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 January 2025 Year 2025 This

The ITAT held that the assessment years 2009-10, 2010-11 and ...


Tax Assessments Quashed for 2009-2012: Invalid Notices and Jurisdiction; Additions Unsustainable Due to Procedural Errors.

January 8, 2025

Case Laws     Income Tax     AT

The ITAT held that the assessment years 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12 were beyond the 10-year limitation period u/s 153C read with Explanation-1 to section 153A. Hence, the notice issued and assessments made u/s 153C for these years were barred by limitation, invalid, and quashed for want of valid jurisdiction. The consolidated satisfaction notes recorded by the AOs for multiple years were improper as separate notes were required year-wise. The additions made u/s 68 for the years 2009-10 to 2013-14 were unsustainable due to lack of jurisdiction and invalid, and hence quashed. The approval granted u/s 153D was treated as invalid and bad in law due to lack of proper application of mind and recording of satisfaction by the Addl. CIT. The addition of Rs. 60 lakh u/s 68 for 2009-10 was unjustified as no credit entry was found in the books. The addition of Rs. 1.25 crore u/s 68 for 2013-14 was deleted as it involved double taxation of amounts already offered under IDS 2016.

View Source

 


 

You may also like:

  1. 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...

  2. Amendment of HBP Vol I (RE 2012)/ 2009-14 - Public Notice

  3. ITAT ruled the assessment order invalid due to procedural deficiencies and lack of proper jurisdiction. The AO failed to issue mandatory notice under Section 143(2)...

  4. Notice u/s 143(2) issued by a non-jurisdictional Assessing Officer/Deputy Commissioner is invalid and cannot be cured. The assessment order framed u/s 143(3) based on...

  5. ITAT invalidated reassessment proceedings due to jurisdictional defects in notice issuance under s.148. ITO Ward 3(2), Bulandsahar transferred assessee's records to ITO...

  6. Validity of assessment - no notice u/s 143(2) - the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer (DCIT) was bad in law for want of issuance of notice u/s 143(2) of...

  7. The HC held that the Jurisdictional Assessment Officer (JAO) has exclusive jurisdiction to issue notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act. For assessment, re-assessment or...

  8. Undisclosed stock - relevant assessment year - additions for the financial year 2012-2013 relevant to assessment year 2013-2014 - Once the statements have been accepted...

  9. The Appellate Tribunal held that the assessment orders issued u/s 153C for the assessment years 2011-12 and 2012-13 were beyond the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer...

  10. The High Court examined the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer (AO) and the prescribed income-tax authority to issue notices u/s 143(2) of the Income Tax Act. It held...

  11. Reopening of assessment u/s 147 for addition u/s 68 on share premium received by petitioner from Gold Singapore was challenged. Reassessment proceedings initiated...

  12. ITAT quashed assessment order due to jurisdictional defect in notice issuance under Section 143(2). While ACIT had pecuniary jurisdiction to conduct assessment of...

  13. Jurisdiction powers to issue Reopening notice in metro city - It was established that the notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued by an Income Tax Officer (ITO),...

  14. The applicability of the Notification dated 13.09.2012 in the present case, where the goods were seized in 2008-2009, was examined. As per the Notification, the...

  15. 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...

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates