section 148a(d)

Judgments on section 148a(d)

• M/s Dilsa Distributers Combines vs ITO-11(1)(1) — ITAT, 2013
  The statement of a third party cannot be used against the assessee without providing an opportunity for cross-examination.
• Voltas Limited vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -8(3) (1), Mumbai — HC, 2022
  Reopening of assessment based solely on a change of opinion is impermissible under the Income Tax Act.
• DCIT (Central Circle-1) vs Shree Ganesh Edibles Pvt. Ltd. — ITAT,
  Once the assessee furnishes identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the lender, the onus shifts to the AO to prove otherwise.
• Arya Roadways Company Pvt. Ltd. vs I.T.O., Ward-12(1), Kolkata — ITAT,
  The case was remanded to ensure a fair opportunity for the assessee to substantiate its claims regarding the expenditure.
• Union of India & Ors. vs Rajeev Bansal — SC,
  Reassessment notices issued under the old regime are deemed valid under the new regime due to the application of TOLA and judicial directions.
• Manisha Agarwal vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 59(1), Delhi & Ors. — HC,
  A reassessment notice issued beyond the surviving time limit under the Income Tax Act read with TOLA is time-barred.
• Hexaware Technologies Limited vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax — HC,
  Reassessment notices issued after 1st April 2021 must comply with the amended provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and cannot rely on the erstwhile provisions.
• Chhugamal Rajpal vs S. P. Chaliha & Ors. — SC,
  A notice under Section 148 cannot be issued without the Income-tax Officer having prima facie grounds and the Commissioner's satisfaction based on recorded reasons.
• Pawan Sachdeva vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 19(3), Delhi & Anr. — HC,
  Issuance of notice within the limitation period is sufficient for jurisdiction, even if the service occurs later or with errors.
• T.K.S. Builders Pvt. Ltd. vs Income Tax Officer Ward 25(3) New Delhi — HC,
  Notices under Section 148 must be issued through automated allocation and in a faceless manner as per the Faceless Assessment Scheme.
• Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd. vs Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax — HC,
  Reopening of assessment based on a change of opinion without new tangible material is not justified.
• Twylight Infrastructure Pvt Ltd vs Income Tax Officer Ward 25 3 Delhi and Ors. — HC,
  Approval from the specified authority is mandatory for issuing reassessment notices under Section 148.
• Union of India & Ors. vs Rajeev Bansal — SC,
  Reassessment notices issued after 1 April 2021 should be treated as issued under the new regime, with TOLA extending the time limits for compliance.
• Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-3 vs Abhisar Buildwell P. Ltd. — SC,
  In the absence of incriminating material, the AO cannot assess or reassess completed/unabated assessments under Section 153A.
• Union of India & Anr. vs M/s. Ganpati Dealcom Pvt. Ltd. — SC,
  The 2016 Amendment Act cannot be applied retrospectively as it creates new offences and substantive changes, which cannot be applied to past transactions.
• Chhugamal Rajpal vs S. P. Chaliha & Ors. — SC,
  The Income-tax Officer must have prima facie grounds and record reasons before issuing a notice under Section 148, and the Commissioner must apply his mind before granting sanction.
• Anand Education Society vs Asstt. Director of Income Tax(E) — ITAT,
  The AO must substantiate claims of excessive payments to relatives with evidence of unreasonableness compared to market standards.
• Ananta Landmark Pvt. Ltd. vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax — HC,
  Reopening of assessment after four years requires both conditions of income escaping assessment and failure to disclose material facts to be satisfied.
• Bhagwati Ferro Metal Pvt. Ltd. vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax — HC,
  A notice under Section 148 must be issued by the Faceless Assessing Officer, and failure to do so is a fatal defect.
• Mon Mohan Kohli vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr — HC,
  The government cannot extend the applicability of statutory provisions through notifications without explicit legislative authority.
• Manju Somani vs Income Tax Officer Ward-70(1) & Ors. — HC,
  A reassessment notice issued post-01 April 2021 must comply with the time limits prescribed by the pre-amendment provisions of Section 149 if the assessment year is prior to 01 April 2021.
• Price Waterhouse Coopers Pvt. Ltd. vs Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata-I — SC, 2012
  A bona fide and inadvertent error does not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars or concealment of income.
• GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. vs Income Tax Officer and Ors. — SC,
  When a notice under Section 148 is issued, the noticee should file a return and may seek reasons, which the assessing officer must provide, allowing the noticee to file objections that must be dispose
• ITO, Ward 13 (1) vs M/s. Navodaya Castles Pvt. Ltd. — ITAT,
  The AO must independently apply his mind to the information received before initiating proceedings under Section 147/148.
• Mon Mohan Kohli vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr — HC,
  The Government cannot extend the applicability of legislative provisions beyond the dates specified by the Legislature through notifications.