<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2024 (11) TMI 952 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761966</link>
    <description>The ITAT Delhi ruled that the AO improperly reopened assessment under Section 147 based on incriminating material found during search operations at a third party&#039;s premises. The assessee received share applications from a company that the Investigation Wing identified as a shell company providing accommodation entries. The ITAT held that when incriminating material is recovered from third-party premises during search, proceedings should be initiated under Section 153C rather than Section 147. The addition under Section 68 treating the transaction as non-genuine could not be sustained due to improper reopening procedure. The CIT(A) failed to address the assessee&#039;s submissions regarding the legality of reopening.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 Nov 2024 09:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=778567" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (11) TMI 952 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761966</link>
      <description>The ITAT Delhi ruled that the AO improperly reopened assessment under Section 147 based on incriminating material found during search operations at a third party&#039;s premises. The assessee received share applications from a company that the Investigation Wing identified as a shell company providing accommodation entries. The ITAT held that when incriminating material is recovered from third-party premises during search, proceedings should be initiated under Section 153C rather than Section 147. The addition under Section 68 treating the transaction as non-genuine could not be sustained due to improper reopening procedure. The CIT(A) failed to address the assessee&#039;s submissions regarding the legality of reopening.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761966</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>