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.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
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:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    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 :

        📋
        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

        <h1>Assessment reopening invalid due to missing mandatory reasons and limitation period violation under section 148</h1> <h3>Susheel Kumar Govindram Saraff Versus Income Tax Officer, Int Tax Ward 4 (2) (1), Mumbai</h3> The ITAT Mumbai held that reopening of assessment was invalid and barred by limitation. The AO failed to record mandatory reasons before issuing notice ... Validity of Reopening of assessment as barred by limitation - as argued reasons recorded for reopening the assessment were based on a change of opinion - HELD THAT:- Recording of reasons therefore is very important factor, to be taken care of by the assessing officer. Section 148(2) stipulates that, AO shall before issuing notice u/s 148 record the reasons for doing so. Which means before issuing notice u/s 148 recording of reason is mandatory and prerequisite to assume jurisdiction by the AO to initiate reassessment proceedings u/s. 147. Even when no return of income was filed, the basic requirement of recording reasons must be fulfilled. Department’s contention that since the assessee had not filed return of income and this was not a case of reassessment, the recording of reasons was not required was not acceptable. Power of reopening was not exercised in a fair manner. Admittedly, the reasons were issued by an officer who completed the reassessment by issuing notice under section 143(2), is different from the officer who initiated reassessment proceeding by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act. The revenue placed nothing on record to show any thing contrary to the observation by this Tribunal. Thus the officer who issued notice u/s 148 had not recorded reasons prior to its issuance and therefore did not validly assume jurisdiction to reopen the assessment. The reasons recorded are post 31/03/2021, is beyond the period of 6 years and is therefore barred by limitation. Decided in favour of assessee. ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDEREDThe core legal questions considered in this judgment were:Whether the reassessment proceedings initiated under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, were barred by limitation and therefore invalid.Whether the directions issued by the Dispute Resolution Panel under section 144C(5) were legally sound.Whether the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment were based on a change of opinion and thus invalid.Whether the assessee was denied the opportunity to cross-examine witnesses and access underlying material, thereby violating principles of natural justice.Whether the addition of income under section 68 concerning short-term capital gains was justified.ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS1. Validity of Reassessment ProceedingsRelevant Legal Framework and Precedents: The legal framework involved sections 147 and 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court referenced the Supreme Court's decisions in National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT and Jute Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. CIT regarding the admission of additional grounds.Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The Tribunal noted that the reasons for reopening were recorded by a different officer than the one who issued the notice under section 148, which contravened the procedural requirements. The Tribunal emphasized the necessity of recording reasons before issuing a notice under section 148.Key Evidence and Findings: The Tribunal found that the reasons were recorded after the issuance of the notice, which was beyond the prescribed timeline, thereby rendering the reassessment proceedings invalid.Application of Law to Facts: The Tribunal applied the legal requirement that reasons must be recorded before issuing a notice under section 148 and found that this requirement was not met.Treatment of Competing Arguments: The Tribunal considered the Department's arguments but found them insufficient to counter the procedural lapses identified.Conclusions: The Tribunal quashed the reassessment notice under section 148 as it was not issued in compliance with the legal requirements, rendering the entire reassessment process invalid.2. Directions Issued by the Dispute Resolution PanelRelevant Legal Framework and Precedents: The framework involved section 144C(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The Tribunal did not delve deeply into this issue as the reassessment proceedings themselves were quashed.Conclusions: The issue became academic following the quashing of the reassessment proceedings.3. Change of OpinionRelevant Legal Framework and Precedents: The Tribunal referenced the principle that reassessment based on a mere change of opinion is not permissible.Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The Tribunal found that the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment were based on a change of opinion, which is not a valid ground for reassessment.Conclusions: The Tribunal agreed with the assessee's contention that the reassessment was based on a change of opinion and thus invalid.4. Violation of Principles of Natural JusticeRelevant Legal Framework and Precedents: The principle of natural justice requires that the assessee be given an opportunity to cross-examine witnesses and access material relied upon by the assessing officer.Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The Tribunal noted the assessee's claim of not being provided an opportunity to cross-examine witnesses or access underlying material.Conclusions: This issue was not addressed in detail as the reassessment proceedings were quashed on other grounds.5. Addition of Income under Section 68Relevant Legal Framework and Precedents: Section 68 of the Income-tax Act deals with unexplained cash credits.Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The Tribunal did not address this issue substantively due to the quashing of the reassessment proceedings.Conclusions: The issue became academic following the quashing of the reassessment proceedings.SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGSVerbatim Quotes of Crucial Legal Reasoning: 'The officer who issued notice under section 148 had not recorded reasons prior to its issuance and therefore did not validly assume jurisdiction to reopen the assessment.'Core Principles Established: The necessity of recording reasons before issuing a notice under section 148 and the prohibition against reassessment based on a mere change of opinion.Final Determinations on Each Issue: The Tribunal quashed the reassessment notice and the consequential reassessment order, rendering other issues academic.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found