Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Court Rules Section 147 Assessment Not 'Regular' for Penalties</h1> <h3>Commissioner Of Income-Tax Versus Smt. Radha Devi Poddar</h3> Commissioner Of Income-Tax Versus Smt. Radha Devi Poddar - [1990] 185 ITR 544, 82 CTR 42, 47 TAXMANN 344 Issues Involved:1. Whether an assessment framed u/s 143(3)/147(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, constitutes 'regular assessment' for the purpose of levying penalty u/s 273(b).Summary:Issue 1: Definition and Scope of 'Regular Assessment'The Tribunal referred the question of whether an assessment framed u/s 143(3)/147(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, constitutes 'regular assessment' in the course of which penalty u/s 273(b) can be levied. The facts revealed that the deceased did not file any return of income, leading to proceedings initiated u/s 147(a) read with section 148. The Income-tax Officer completed assessments u/s 143(3)/147(a) and imposed penalties for not filing estimates of advance tax u/s 212(3).Issue 2: Tribunal and Commissioner (Appeals) FindingsThe Commissioner (Appeals) canceled the penalty orders, noting that 'regular assessment' as per section 2(40) meant assessments made u/s 143 or 144, which did not cover assessments u/s 147(a). The Tribunal upheld this view, stating that an assessment or reassessment made u/s 147 cannot be considered a 'regular assessment' to which section 273(a) can be applied.Issue 3: Arguments and PrecedentsMr. Mitra, representing the Revenue, argued that assessments made u/s 147 should be treated as 'regular assessments' under section 143, citing the Bombay High Court judgment in Deviprasad Kejriwal v. CIT. However, this case was decided under the 1922 Act, which did not define 'regular assessment'. The 1961 Act defines 'regular assessment' in section 2(40) as assessments made u/s 143 or 144.Issue 4: Analysis of Section 147 and Related ProvisionsThe court analyzed that section 147 comes into play only when assessments cannot be made u/s 143 or 144 due to the expiration of the time limit for issuing notices u/s 139(2). Therefore, an assessment made u/s 147 cannot be described as an assessment made u/s 143 or 144. The court emphasized that the Income-tax Officer's jurisdiction to assess escaped income is acquired through a notice u/s 148, and the assessment made pursuant to such notice is treated as an assessment under section 147.Issue 5: Judicial Consensus and InterpretationThe court referred to several judgments from various High Courts, including Kerala, Punjab and Haryana, Allahabad, Patna, and Orissa, which supported the view that 'regular assessment' does not include reassessments u/s 147. The court also noted that the statutory language and procedural distinctions between sections 143, 144, and 147 support this interpretation.Conclusion:The court concluded that an assessment made u/s 147 cannot be equated to an assessment made u/s 143 or 144 and cannot be brought within the definition of 'regular assessment' in section 2(40). The question was answered in the negative and in favor of the assessee, with no order as to costs.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found