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

        Court dismisses writ challenging Income Tax Act notices & orders, deems premature, directs exhausting statutory remedies.

        Stewart Science College (Christian Minority Educational Institution Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 (1) Cuttack

        Stewart Science College (Christian Minority Educational Institution Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 (1) Cuttack - [2022] 449 ITR 257 (Ori) Issues Involved:
        1. Validity of the notice issued under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
        2. Validity of the order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
        3. Requirement of filing a return under Section 139(4C)(e) for Assessment Years prior to 2016-17.
        4. Examination of exemption claims under Section 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
        5. Applicability of the principle of exhaustion of alternative remedies under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

        Detailed Analysis:

        1. Validity of the Notice Issued Under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961:
        The petitioner-College challenged the notice dated 22.03.2022 issued under Section 148A(b) on the grounds that it was not required to file a return for the Assessment Year 2015-16 due to exemptions under Section 10(23C)(iiiab). The notice was based on information suggesting that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. The court observed that the Assessing Officer had information about cash deposits and interest income, which justified the issuance of the notice under Section 148A(b).

        2. Validity of the Order Passed Under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961:
        The petitioner contended that the order dated 31.03.2022 under Section 148A(d) lacked application of mind and was based on a preconceived approach. The court found that the Assessing Officer, after considering the petitioner's reply, had validly issued the notice under Section 148, as the petitioner had not filed the Income Tax Return (ITR) and had not satisfactorily explained the transactions in question.

        3. Requirement of Filing a Return Under Section 139(4C)(e) for Assessment Years Prior to 2016-17:
        The petitioner argued that there was no requirement to file a return for the Assessment Year 2015-16 because the provisions of Section 139(4C)(e) were effective from AY 2016-17. The court noted that the petitioner had filed a return under Section 139(4A) after receiving the notice under Section 148, indicating compliance with the notice. The court also highlighted that the petitioner had the opportunity to present its case during the assessment proceedings.

        4. Examination of Exemption Claims Under Section 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Income Tax Act, 1961:
        The court examined whether the petitioner-College was 'wholly or substantially financed by the Government' and 'existing solely for educational purposes and not for purposes of profit' as required under Section 10(23C)(iiiab). The court emphasized that these are matters of fact to be adjudicated by the Assessing Officer based on the evidence provided by the petitioner. The court found that the petitioner had not furnished the necessary return initially, justifying the issuance of the notice for assessment of escaped income.

        5. Applicability of the Principle of Exhaustion of Alternative Remedies Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India:
        The court reiterated the principle that the existence of an alternative remedy does not bar the exercise of writ jurisdiction but emphasized that it should be exercised sparingly. The court held that the petitioner should first exhaust the statutory remedies available under the Income Tax Act before seeking judicial intervention. The court cited several precedents to support this view and dismissed the writ petition as premature, directing the petitioner to present its case before the Assessing Officer.

        Conclusion:
        The court dismissed the writ petition challenging the notices and orders issued under Sections 148A(b), 148A(d), and 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The court held that the petitioner had ample opportunity to present its case during the assessment proceedings and that the writ petition was premature. The court emphasized the need to exhaust alternative remedies before seeking judicial intervention under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found