Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

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 / NCLT & Others
  • 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
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
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
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 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
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    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
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      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

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2019 (9) TMI 857 - AT - Income Tax

        📋
        Contents
        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

        Tribunal invalidates assessment order for lack of independent verification, citing legal violation The Tribunal quashed the notice issued under Section 148 and the assessment order, finding that the Assessing Officer's actions lacked independent ...
                      Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                          Tribunal invalidates assessment order for lack of independent verification, citing legal violation

                          The Tribunal quashed the notice issued under Section 148 and the assessment order, finding that the Assessing Officer's actions lacked independent verification and were based solely on information from the Investigation Wing, violating legal requirements. The Tribunal held that reopening assessments for verification purposes is impermissible under the law. Multiple judgments supported this decision, leading to the appeals being allowed and the notices and assessment orders being invalidated.




                          Issues Involved:
                          1. Legality of the assumption of jurisdiction under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
                          2. Validity of the assessment order passed under Section 147/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

                          Detailed Analysis:

                          1. Legality of the Assumption of Jurisdiction under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961:

                          The primary issue raised by the assessee was the legality of the assumption of jurisdiction under Section 148 by the Assessing Officer (AO). The assessee argued that the AO issued the notice under Section 148 mechanically without independent application of mind, relying solely on the information provided by the Investigation Wing. The assessee contended that this action violated the mandatory jurisdictional conditions stipulated under the Act.

                          The Tribunal reviewed the reasons recorded for the issuance of the notice under Section 148 and found that the AO had issued the notice based on borrowed satisfaction from the Investigation Wing without independent verification or application of mind. The Tribunal noted that the AO had concluded there was escapement of income solely based on information from the Investigation Wing, without any tangible material or independent assessment.

                          The Tribunal referenced a similar case, M/s SBS Realtors (P) Ltd. Vs. ITO, where the ITAT Delhi had quashed the assessment on similar grounds. The Tribunal reiterated that reopening an assessment under Section 147 for the purpose of verification of genuineness, identification, and creditworthiness of transactions is not permissible under law. The Tribunal emphasized that such actions should be conducted under Section 143(2) within the prescribed time limit, and once that time limit expires, Section 148 cannot be invoked merely for verification purposes.

                          2. Validity of the Assessment Order Passed under Section 147/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961:

                          The Tribunal found that the AO's actions were not in compliance with the legal requirements. The reasons recorded for reopening the assessment were found to be contradictory. While the AO initially stated that income had escaped assessment, the concluding part of the reasons recorded indicated that the case was being reopened to verify the genuineness of transactions. The Tribunal held that reopening an assessment for verification purposes is not permissible.

                          The Tribunal also highlighted that the AO's satisfaction was based on the mere report from the Investigation Wing, without any independent application of mind or tangible material linking the information to the formation of belief of escapement of income. The Tribunal found that there was no crucial link between the information received and the AO's conclusion of escapement of income.

                          The Tribunal referenced multiple judgments from the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court, including cases like Sarthak Securities Co.P.Ltd. Vs. ITO, Signature Hotels P.Ltd. Vs. ITO, and PCIT Vs. G And G Pharma India Ltd., which supported the assessee's contention that notices issued under Section 148 based solely on Investigation Wing reports without independent verification are invalid.

                          Consequently, the Tribunal quashed the notice issued under Section 148 and the assessment order passed in pursuance thereof. The Tribunal held that since the notice under Section 148 was quashed, the subsequent assessment order was also invalid. Therefore, the other grounds raised by the assessee did not require adjudication on merits.

                          Conclusion:

                          The Tribunal allowed the appeals filed by the different assessees, quashing the notices issued under Section 148 and the assessment orders passed in pursuance thereof. The decision was pronounced on 14/08/2019.
                          Full Summary is available for active users!
                          Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                          Topics

                          ActsIncome Tax
                          No Records Found