Just a moment...
AI-powered research trained on the authentic TaxTMI database.
Launch AI Search →Powered by Weblekha - Building Scalable Websites
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Income tax reassessment notice timing: Covid-era time exclusion saves s.147/s.148 limitation; Principal Commissioner's s.151(i) sanction upheld.</h1> The dominant issue was whether reassessment proceedings under s.147 could be initiated within limitation by applying statutory saving/exclusion of time, ... Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - period of limitation - Issue of notice where income has escaped assessment - sanction granted by the Principal Commissioner in accordance with Section 151 (i) - saving of limitation application As decided by HC [2025 (8) TMI 917 - PATNA HIGH COURT] Department would be entitled to get the benefit of saving of limitation for the period 1st of April 2021 to 20th March, 2022. If that period is excluded from counting the limitation, notice under Section 148 of the Act of 1961 issued on 25.09.2024 would not be barred by limitation. In such circumstance, the sanction granted by the Principal Commissioner in accordance with Section 151 (i) of the Act of 1961 is in accordance with law. HELD THAT:- We see no ground to interfere with the impugned judgement and order of the High Court. Hence, the petition stands dismissed. The Supreme Court declined to exercise its jurisdiction to disturb the High Court's decision, holding: 'We see no ground to interfere with the impugned judgement and order of the High Court.' On that basis, the Court dismissed the petition: 'Hence, the petition stands dismissed.' The order reflects a determination that the case did not warrant appellate interference, and consequently no further relief was granted. Any pending application(s) connected with the petition were also disposed of in light of the dismissal.