ITAT quashed reassessment proceedings where AO provided only 5 ...

Income Tax Officer's 5-Day Notice Period for Section 148A(b) Response Deemed Inadequate, Violating Natural Justice Principles.

January 25, 2025

Case Laws Income Tax AT

ITAT quashed reassessment proceedings where AO provided only 5 days to assessee for filing explanation under s.148A(b). Following judicial precedent that established 7 days as unreasonably short notice period violating natural justice principles, the Tribunal determined 5-day period was inadequate. Matter remanded to AO with directions to provide proper opportunity of being heard to assessee firm per s.148A(b) requirements before proceeding with fresh assessment. Tribunal emphasized compliance with procedural fairness in reopening assessments, particularly regarding reasonable time for response. Appeal allowed for statistical purposes.

View Source

← Previous Next →

ITAT quashed reassessment proceedings where AO provided only 5 ...

Income Tax Officer's 5-Day Notice Period for Section 148A(b) Response Deemed Inadequate, Violating Natural Justice Principles.

January 25, 2025

Case Laws Income Tax AT

You may also like:

The Income Tax Act did not intend to tax deemed rental income from properties held as stock-in-trade prior to the assessment year 2018-19. Section 23(5), introduced from...

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...

Section 80P deduction claim filed in a return submitted in response to notice u/s 142(1) is valid. The Income Tax Act does not mandate that the return must be filed u/ss...

Income-tax Officer (Intelligence) authority to issue notice u/s 133(6) - Jurisdiction of Income Tax Authorities u/s 120 - From the reliance on the notification dated...

The High Court held that the petitioner was not given adequate time to respond to a show cause notice, as only 6 clear working days were provided instead of the required...

This case deals with the accrual of income in India from exploration activities and the determination of whether the assessee has a Permanent Establishment (PE) in India...

The ITAT Delhi held that the notice issued by a non-jurisdictional Assessing Officer u/s 148 was invalid. The jurisdiction over the assessee was with a different...

Validity of Service of notice u/s 74(5) instead of u/s 74(1) of CGST / UPGST Act, 2017 - Non-payment of Tax / GST - The High Court observed that while a notice was...

The Public Notice clarifies the following regarding Customs Cargo Service Providers (CCSPs) and Authorized Economic Operators - Logistics Operators (AEO-LOs): Regulation...

The summary highlights the key difference between the scope of total income under the Income Tax Act and the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and...

Electronic commerce operators (ECOs) required to pay tax u/s 9(5) of CGST Act for specified services supplied through their platform are not required to reverse...

Reopening of assessment u/s 147 was invalid due to procedural irregularities. The Assessing Officer initiated proceedings without verifying information and the...

Non-compliance with principles of natural justice due to non-service of show cause notice. Consultant unaware of proceedings as notices uploaded on GST portal's "View...

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...

ECOs liable for tax under Sec 9(5) of WBGST Act are not required to reverse input tax credit on inputs and input services proportionately for specified services supplied...

Quick Updates: