Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI Drafter

Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.

Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review

The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.

• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required


Step 2 – Draft Generation

Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.

• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review.

Try Now
×

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

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2024 (10) TMI 1082 - 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

        Section 153C assessments invalid after 10-year outer ceiling limit exceeded per Supreme Court Jasjit Singh decision The ITAT Delhi held that assessments under Section 153C for Assessment Years 2011-12 and 2012-13 were invalid as they exceeded the 10-year outer ceiling ...
                        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.

                            Section 153C assessments invalid after 10-year outer ceiling limit exceeded per Supreme Court Jasjit Singh decision

                            The ITAT Delhi held that assessments under Section 153C for Assessment Years 2011-12 and 2012-13 were invalid as they exceeded the 10-year outer ceiling limit. Following the Supreme Court decision in Jasjit Singh, the tribunal determined that the 10-year period should be computed backward from the end of the assessment year when the jurisdictional assessing officer recorded the satisfaction note (2022-23), making the contested assessment years fall beyond the statutory time limit. The appeal was decided in favor of the assessee.




                            Issues Involved:

                            1. Legality of initiation of proceedings under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act.
                            2. Validity of assessment orders for AY 2011-12 and 2012-13.
                            3. Confirmation of additions under Section 69 for unexplained investments.
                            4. Procedural fairness in issuing notices and remand reports.
                            5. Initiation of penalty proceedings under Section 271(c).

                            Detailed Analysis:

                            1. Legality of Initiation of Proceedings under Section 153C:

                            The primary issue revolves around the legality of the initiation of proceedings under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act. The Assessee contended that the initiation was "bad in law and void ab initio" as notices under Section 153C cannot be issued beyond six years and up to ten years when the income escaped is less than Rs. 50 Lakhs. The Assessee argued that the alleged income escaping assessment for AY 2008-09 to 2011-12 was only Rs. 48,00,000/-, which is below the threshold of Rs. 50,00,000/-. The Tribunal referred to the Supreme Court's judgment in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Jasjeet Singh, which clarified that the period for which returns are required to be filed by the Assessee commences only from the date when materials are forwarded to the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer. The Tribunal found that the proceedings initiated were beyond the ten-year period prescribed by the statute, rendering the assessments for AY 2011-12 and 2012-13 invalid.

                            2. Validity of Assessment Orders for AY 2011-12 and 2012-13:

                            The Tribunal examined the assessment orders for AY 2011-12 and 2012-13, which were framed under Section 153C read with Section 143(3). The Tribunal noted that the search and seizure operation was conducted on 06/03/2018, and the satisfaction note was recorded by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer on 10/11/2021. The Tribunal highlighted that the computation of the ten-year period should run backward from the end of the assessment year 2022-23, which results in the period starting from AY 2013-14. Since the appeals pertain to AY 2011-12 and 2012-13, they fall beyond the ten-year limit, making the assessments invalid.

                            3. Confirmation of Additions under Section 69 for Unexplained Investments:

                            The Assessee challenged the confirmation of additions of Rs. 48,00,000/- and Rs. 5,20,000/- under Section 69 for unexplained investments. The Tribunal noted that the Assessing Officer made these additions based on seized material and statements without providing the Assessee an opportunity for cross-examination. The Tribunal found merit in the Assessee's argument that the additions were not justified, as they were based on insufficient evidence and procedural lapses.

                            4. Procedural Fairness in Issuing Notices and Remand Reports:

                            The Assessee argued that the issuance of a modified show-cause notice and reliance on a remand report without granting a personal hearing were procedurally unfair. The Tribunal acknowledged that the Assessee was not given an opportunity to file a rejoinder to the remand report, as the communication was not received. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of procedural fairness and found that the Assessee's rights were compromised.

                            5. Initiation of Penalty Proceedings under Section 271(c):

                            The Assessee raised concerns about the initiation of penalty proceedings under Section 271(c) being unjustified. However, the Tribunal primarily focused on the invalidity of the assessment proceedings, which inherently affected the penalty proceedings. Since the assessments were set aside, the related penalty proceedings were also deemed to lack a valid basis.

                            Conclusion:

                            The Tribunal allowed the appeals of the Assessee, setting aside the assessment orders for AY 2011-12 and 2012-13 due to the invalid initiation of proceedings under Section 153C and procedural lapses. The Tribunal's decision underscores the importance of adhering to statutory timelines and ensuring procedural fairness in tax assessments.
                            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