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

        Appeals allowed as reassessment valid under Income-tax Act; CBDT's revised instructions considered fresh material

        First Income-Tax Officer. Versus South India Corporation Agency Limited.

        First Income-Tax Officer. Versus South India Corporation Agency Limited. - ITD 006, 200, Issues Involved:
        1. Validity of reassessment proceedings initiated under section 147(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
        2. Interpretation and application of Rule 115 of the Income-tax Rules, 1962.
        3. Binding nature of CBDT circulars and instructions on Income-tax authorities.

        Detailed Analysis:

        1. Validity of Reassessment Proceedings Initiated Under Section 147(b):

        The primary issue in these appeals revolves around the validity of the reassessment proceedings initiated by the Income-tax Officer (ITO) under section 147(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The original assessments were completed on 8-7-1976, where the freight income was converted into rupees at Rs. 7.29 per US dollar based on the instructions issued by the CBDT in 1972. However, the CBDT issued revised instructions in 1978, directing the exchange rate to be Rs. 7.50 per US dollar. The ITO, based on this new information, initiated reassessment proceedings under section 147(b).

        The assessee contended that there was no new information as required under section 147(b), and the ITO merely changed his opinion based on the same material. The Commissioner (Appeals) agreed with the assessee, holding that the revised instructions did not constitute new information and thus, the reassessment proceedings were invalid.

        Upon appeal, the Tribunal held that the revised instructions issued by the CBDT in 1978 constituted fresh material and information within the meaning of section 147(b). The Tribunal emphasized that the ITO had new information in his possession, which led him to believe that income had escaped assessment. Consequently, the initiation of reassessment proceedings under section 147(b) was deemed valid.

        2. Interpretation and Application of Rule 115:

        Rule 115 of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, pertains to the exchange rate for converting foreign currency income into rupees. The ITO initially adopted an exchange rate of Rs. 7.29 per US dollar based on the 1972 instructions. The revised instructions in 1978 directed the exchange rate to be Rs. 7.50 per US dollar.

        The Tribunal highlighted that the Board's instructions interpreting Rule 115 were binding on the income-tax authorities. The revised instructions provided fresh material for the ITO to reassess the income, as they constituted new information regarding the exchange rate.

        3. Binding Nature of CBDT Circulars and Instructions:

        The Tribunal discussed the binding nature of CBDT circulars and instructions under section 119 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. It was emphasized that the CBDT, as the highest executive authority, has the power to issue instructions and directions to income-tax authorities, which are binding. The Tribunal referred to several Supreme Court decisions, including Navnit Lal C. Javeri v. K.K. Sen, AAC, and Ellerman Lines Ltd. v. CIT, which affirmed the binding nature of CBDT circulars on income-tax authorities.

        The Tribunal concluded that the revised instructions issued by the CBDT in 1978 were binding on the ITO. The instructions provided new information that justified the reopening of assessments under section 147(b). The Tribunal disagreed with the Commissioner (Appeals) and held that the reassessment proceedings were valid.

        Conclusion:

        The Tribunal allowed the appeals, holding that the reassessment proceedings initiated by the ITO under section 147(b) were valid based on the fresh information provided by the revised CBDT instructions. The matter was remanded back to the Commissioner (Appeals) for deciding the appeals on merit.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found