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
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2026 (3) TMI 536

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., the La. CIT(A) erred in appreciating the evidences and findings arising out of search and investigation in the Alankit Group, which conclusively established manipulation of share prices and the use of the scrip for generating bogus profits. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the income was already disclosed as business income ignoring the fact that the entire credit of Rs. 37,76,422/- represented unexplained receipts not supported by genuine business activity and thus rightly taxable u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in in not appreciating that mere contract notes and banking channels do not establish genuineness, when the underlying transactions are part of an accommodation entry network. 5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that sustaining the addition would amount to double taxation. without appreciating that section 68 operates independently of the profit and loss disclosure and the burden lies on the assessee to establish genuineness of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sment proceeding u/s 147 of the Act have not been satisfied. 7. The Respondent craves to add, alter, classify, reclassify, delete or modify any of the above grounds of appeal and requests to consider each of the above grounds without prejudice to one another." 3. Since the issue raised in the cross-objection challenging the validity of the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act goes to the root of the assessment proceedings and strikes at the very jurisdiction assumed by the Ld. AO, we deem it appropriate to adjudicate the same at the outset. The validity of the reassessment notice being a foundational issue, its determination is essential before proceeding to examine the merits of the additions made in the impugned assessment order. Accordingly, we first take up the grounds raised in the cross-objection relating to the legality and validity of the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act. 4. The Ld.AR submitted that, assessee raised legal issue challenging the validity of the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act under the new regime for reopening of the assessment. He submitted that original notice u/s 148 issued under the old regime was dated 28/06/2021, to reopen the assessment. Th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....to save the assessees from harassment resulting from the mechanical reopening of assessments Sri krishna (P.) Ltd. v. ITO [1996] 87 Taxman 315/221 ITR 538 (SC)/[1996] 9 SCC 534. A table representing the prescription under the old and new regime is set out below: Regime Time limits Specified authority Section 151(2) of the regime old Before expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year Joint Commissioner Section 151(1) of the old regime After expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner Commissioner Section 151(i) of the new regime Three years or less than three years from the end of the relevant assessment year Principal Commissioner or Principal Director Or Commissioner or Director Section 151(ii) of the new regime More than three years have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year Principal Chief Commissioner or Principal Director General or Chief Commissioner or Director General 74. The above table indicates that the specified authority is directly co- related to the time when the notice is issued.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t sanction. Section 151(ii) of the new regime prescribes a higher level of authority if more than three years have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year. Thus, non- compliance by the assessing officer with the strict time limits prescribed under section 151 affects their jurisdiction to issue a notice under section 148. 77. Parliament enacted TOLA to ensure that the interests of the Revenue are not defeated because the assessing officer could not comply with the pre conditions due to the difficulties that arose during the COVID-19 pandemic. Section 3(1) of TOLA relaxes the time limit for compliance with actions that fall for completion from 20th March 2020 to 31st March 2021. TOLA will accordingly extend the time limit for the grant of sanction by the authority specified under section 151. The test to determine whether TOLA will apply to Section 151 of the new regime is this: if the time limit of three years from the end of an assessment year falls between 20th March 2020 and 31st March 2021, then the specified authority under section 151(i) has an extended time till 30th June 2021 to grant approval. In the case of Section 151 of the old regime, the test is:....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the specified authorities under section 151 for Section 148A(b). It is well established that this Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Article 142, is not bound by the procedural requirements of law High Court Bar Association v. State of UP [2024] 160 taxmann.com 32/299 Taxman 21 (SC)/[2024] 6 SCC 267. 81. This Court in Ashish Agarwal (supra) directed the assessing officers to "pass orders in terms of Section 148A(d) in respect of each of the assesses concerned." Further, it directed the assessing officers to issue a notice under Section 148 of the new regime "after following the procedure as required under section 148A." Although this Court waived off the requirement of obtaining prior approval under section 148A(a) and Section 148A(b), it did not waive the requirement for Section 148A(d) and Section 148. Therefore, the assessing officer was required to obtain prior approval of the specified authority according to Section 151 of the new regime before passing an order under section 148A(d) or issuing a notice under section 148. These notices ought to have been issued following the time limits specified under section 151 of the new regime read with TOLA, where app....