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 :

        2007 (7) TMI 341 - 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 Reassessment Due to Improper Reopening; Deletes Disallowance of Expenses Supported by Past Records. The Tribunal allowed the appeal, declaring the reassessment proceedings invalid due to the improper reopening under section 148 after four years, as the ...
                      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 Reassessment Due to Improper Reopening; Deletes Disallowance of Expenses Supported by Past Records.

                          The Tribunal allowed the appeal, declaring the reassessment proceedings invalid due to the improper reopening under section 148 after four years, as the assessee had fully disclosed all material facts during the original assessment. The Tribunal found the reopening was based on a change of opinion, which is not permissible. Additionally, the Tribunal deleted the disallowance of Rs. 75,96,534 for previous year expenses, noting that similar expenses had been allowed in prior years and were supported by detailed explanations and documents.




                          Issues Involved:
                          1. Validity of reopening the assessment under section 148 after four years.
                          2. Disallowance of Rs. 75,96,534 on account of previous year expenses.

                          Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

                          1. Validity of Reopening the Assessment under Section 148 After Four Years:

                          The assessee contested the validity of the reopening of the assessment under section 148, arguing that it was done after four years from the end of the relevant assessment year without any failure on their part to disclose fully and truly all material facts. The original assessment was completed under section 143(3) on 29-2-2000, and the notice under section 148 was issued on 7-2-2003, which was beyond the four-year limit stipulated by the proviso to section 147.

                          The assessee had disclosed all relevant facts during the original assessment, including details of prior period expenses in the balance sheet, profit and loss account, and tax audit report. The Assessing Officer had raised queries regarding these expenses during the original assessment, and the assessee had provided detailed replies and supporting documents, which were considered by the Assessing Officer.

                          The CIT(A) upheld the reopening, stating that the assessee had not made a true and full disclosure. However, the Tribunal found that the assessee had indeed disclosed all material facts and that the Assessing Officer had applied his mind and taken a conscious decision during the original assessment. The Tribunal noted that the reopening was based on a change of opinion, which is not permissible under the law.

                          The Tribunal relied on several judicial precedents, including the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Sita World Travels (India) Ltd. v. CIT and the Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision in Asstt. CIT v. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd., to conclude that the reassessment was invalid. Consequently, the Tribunal held that the notice issued under section 148 was invalid, and the entire reassessment proceedings were null and void.

                          2. Disallowance of Rs. 75,96,534 on Account of Previous Year Expenses:

                          The assessee argued that the disallowance of Rs. 75,96,534 on account of previous year expenses was unjustified as these expenses had crystallized during the year under consideration. The assessee provided a breakup of the expenses and explained that they were accounted for in the subsequent year because the bills were received after the closure of the books of account for the relevant year.

                          The CIT(A) upheld the disallowance, but the Tribunal found that similar expenses had been allowed in previous years and that the assessee had consistently followed the same method of accounting. The Tribunal noted that the assessee had provided detailed explanations and supporting documents, including copies of bills, to substantiate their claim.

                          The Tribunal referred to its own decisions in the assessee's case for earlier years, where similar disallowances had been deleted, and found no justification for disallowing the previous year's expenses in the year under consideration. The Tribunal concluded that the disallowance was not justified and deleted it on merits.

                          Conclusion:

                          The Tribunal allowed the appeal, holding that the reassessment proceedings were invalid due to the improper reopening of the assessment under section 148 after four years, and also deleted the disallowance of Rs. 75,96,534 on account of previous year expenses on merits.
                          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