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 ✕
🔎 TMI Notes - 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
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • Benami Property
  • Bill
  • Central Excise
  • Companies Law
  • Customs
  • DGFT
  • FEMA
  • GST
  • GST - States
  • IBC
  • Income Tax
  • Indian Laws
  • Money Laundering
  • SEBI
  • SEZ
  • Service Tax
  • VAT / Sales Tax
Types:
---- All Types ----
  • ---- All Types ----
  • Act Rules
  • Case Laws
  • Circulars
  • Manuals
  • News
  • Notifications
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
    Ensuring Procedural Fairness in GST Registration Cancellation: Analysis of a High Court Ruling
    Case LawsService Tax
    The Intersection of International Business and Service Tax: The Export of Services Under Indian Serv...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Jurisdictional Challenges in Tax Assessments: Insights from a Recent ITAT Decision
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    High Court Rules on the Invalidity of Reassessment Notices Issued to a Deceased Person
    From Denial to Grant: A Legal Examination of Bail in Money Laundering Allegations
    GST Registration Cancellation and the Rule of Law: Insights from a Key Bombay High Court Judgment
    Case LawsCentral Excise
    Excise Duty Valuation and Limitation Period Extension: A Legal Analysis of the Supreme Court Judgmen...
    Interpreting Limitation and Acknowledgment of Debt under the IBC: A Detailed Legal Analysis
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Long-Term Capital Gains and Unexplained Cash Credits in Stock Transactions: A Legal Perspective
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Judicial Approach in Transfer Pricing and PE Attribution: Analysis of a Landmark Case: Legal Perspec...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Scrutinizing the Application of Mind in Tax Assessments: Examining the Role of ACIT while granting a...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    TDS Obligations and DTAA: Clarifying Tax Jurisdiction in International Telecom Services
    Judicial Scrutiny of Arrest Powers under GST Legislation: Balancing Individual Rights and Statutory ...
    Navigating the Legal Maze: Electricity Dues vs. Insolvency Proceedings
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Distinction Between Business Income and Deemed Income in Income Tax Assessments: Higher rate of tax ...
    Case LawsCustoms
    From Valuation to Penalty and redemption fine: Legal Implications of Importing Restricted Goods in C...
    Case LawsService Tax
    Analyzing the Implications of Delay in Tax Adjudication: A Case Study
    Case LawsCorporate Laws
    Secured Creditors and Asset Disposal in Liquidation: High Court's Balancing Act
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Analysis of ITAT's Decision on Surplus Stock Taxation
    Contractual Compliance and GST Reimbursement: Unpacking a Landmark Judgment"
❯❯
MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder

No Folders have been created

    +

    Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

    NOTE:

    Notes
    Showing Results for :
    Reset Filters
    Results Found:
    Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Procedural fairness in GST registration: specific, detailed show cause notices are required to protect taxpayer hearing rights.
    Cancellation of GST registration requires adherence to procedural fairness, with show cause notices containing precise and detailed allegations so a taxpayer can mount an effective defence; technical portal limitations do not excuse failures to particularise allegations and authorities should issue a fresh detailed notice where the initial notice is defective.
    Case LawsService Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Export of service: services benefiting a foreign recipient's overseas business can qualify as exports, affecting service tax liability.
    Whether commissions earned by an Indian sub agent for procuring orders for a foreign principal qualify as export of service under the Export of Service Rules 2005 depends on the destination based consumption tax concept: the place where benefit accrues and the location of the service recipient determine export character, and services benefiting a foreign recipient's overseas business that meet the Rules' conditions are treated as exports and outside domestic service tax.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Jurisdictional validity of tax notice: lack of proper jurisdiction can vitiate assessment proceedings and nullify further action.
    The dominant operative point is that a valid scrutiny assessment under Section 143(2) requires issuance by an officer with lawful jurisdiction determined by income thresholds and administrative instructions; failure in jurisdictional competence can render the notice and ensuing assessment proceedings invalid. Procedural fairness-specifically the opportunity to be heard-is a corollary concern, and while issues regarding additions under Section 69A and the tax effect of Section 115BBE are raised, they become academic if the initiation itself is found jurisdictionally flawed.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Validity of reassessment notices: notices issued to a deceased person are void and must be directed to the correct legal entity.
    The High Court held that reassessment notices issued in the name of a deceased assessee are null and void, constituting substantive illegality when directed to a non-existent person; the court emphasized that the correct legal entity must be addressed, that the legal heir's communications and filings were material, and that procedural protections and statutory reopening procedures cannot be bypassed due to administrative or IT constraints.
    Case LawsPMLA
    Show AI Summary
    Bail in money laundering cases-personal liberty and pretrial custody can outweigh investigatory severity when trial is pending.
    The dispute examines bail law in money laundering allegations where the High Court denied bail based on the statutory construction of money laundering and the concept of proceeds of crime, treating the accused as central to an alleged conspiracy; by contrast, the higher court emphasised personal liberty, the duration of pretrial custody, the absence of trial commencement, and the accused's non-inclusion as an accused in the prosecuting agency's charge-sheet, applying the principle of bail over continued detention within the statutory bail regime for money laundering.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Natural justice requires specific show cause particulars and precludes vague retrospective GST registration cancellations.
    The court found the show cause notice to be vague and deficient in particulars, resulting in a breach of natural justice because the taxpayer was not provided relevant material or evidence. It held that retrospective cancellation without specific mention in the notice lacked legal support and stressed that administrative authorities must avoid arbitrary action, provide clear particulars, and adhere to procedural and statutory norms under the GST regime.
    Case LawsCentral Excise
    Show AI Summary
    Excise duty valuation: inclusion of customer duty benefits affects assessable value; intent determines extended limitation applicability.
    Excise duty valuation focuses on whether benefits from transferred advance licences are includable in the transaction value for assessable value, assessed against statutory value principles and precedent. The extended limitation regime requires proof of deliberate evasion-fraud, collusion, willful misstatement, or suppression-and the Court distinguishes honest legal interpretation from intentional suppression, emphasising mens rea and conduct when applying the extended period to valuation disputes.
    Case LawsIBC
    Show AI Summary
    Acknowledgment of debt in corporate records can extend limitation, enabling insolvency petitions after prior procedural stays.
    The tribunal addressed whether acknowledgments in financial statements and corporate conduct extend the limitation period under the Limitation Act for insolvency petitions, factoring in statutory exclusion of time spent under prior SICA proceedings. It held that a holistic appraisal of balance sheet entries, director's reports and the debtor's conduct can constitute an implicit acknowledgment of debt within the limitation period, thereby operating to extend time for filing an insolvency application.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Long-term capital gains preserved where transaction records establish genuineness; mere broker misconduct is insufficient evidence.
    The issue is whether gains from sale of low-priced shares are long-term capital gains or unexplained cash credits under Section 68. The authorities suspected accommodation entries via a broker with a tainted history, but transaction documents-bills, bank payments and contract notes-were held to establish genuineness. Mere suspicion of broker misconduct was deemed insufficient without direct evidence linking the assessee to contrived entries; evidentiary standards and fair hearing obligations were decisive.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Permanent establishment attribution: precedent-driven analysis limits taxable profit allocation to where core value is created in digital services.
    The principal issue is attribution of profits to a Permanent Establishment for cross-border digital reservation services, requiring a fact-sensitive analysis of where core business activities and value creation occur; judicial reasoning relied on materially similar precedent to determine the appropriate share of revenue attributable to the PE, stressing that a mere business connection or digital presence does not automatically justify full profit allocation to the jurisdiction and that clear tracing of value creation is essential to avoid double taxation.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Application of mind in tax approvals: inadequate ACIT scrutiny under Section 153D can invalidate assessments.
    The core issue is whether the ACIT, when granting approval under Section 153D, performed a genuine application of mind by scrutinising assessment records and search material; the Tribunal and High Court found the approval lacked adequate examination, leading to inconsistencies between additions made by the assessing officer and the assessed income, and rendering the assessment unreliable. The matter was treated as factual rather than presenting a substantial question of law.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Royalty characterisation: cross-border telecom payments not taxable as royalty, limiting TDS and extraterritorial jurisdiction.
    Payments by an Indian telecom operator to non-resident carriers for interconnectivity and capacity transfers are not to be characterised as royalty under the applicable DTAA and therefore do not attract TDS; DTAA interpretation governs characterization, Indian jurisdiction is limited over extra territorial income where the foreign entities lack a taxable presence, and retrospective amendments do not impose tax on past transactions compliant with the law at the time.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Duty to comply with GST summons: noncompliance can permit statutory enforcement while safeguards against arbitrary arrest remain.
    The Supreme Court held that individuals summoned under the GST regime have an enforceable duty to comply with lawful summons; non compliance may trigger statutory enforcement, including arrest where prescribed conditions are met. The Court limited judicial interference in administrative enforcement, underscoring that arrest powers under the CGST Act must be exercised within statutory conditions and subject to safeguards against arbitrary action, while permitting authorities to proceed if respondents fail to comply after a final opportunity.
    Case LawsIBC
    Show AI Summary
    Priority of electricity dues questioned as insolvency rules may alter creditor ranking during corporate liquidation.
    The central issue is whether electricity dues constitute a security interest that makes the supplier a secured creditor with a first charge on assets, or whether such dues are operational/governmental claims subordinated by the IBC waterfall; this turns on registration and formal requirements for security interests and on reconciling the Electricity Act's recovery regime with the IBC's overriding, comprehensive insolvency priority scheme.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Deemed income classification denied where surrendered receipts are linked to business activities, avoiding higher tax rate.
    Where surrendered cash, advances and stock discrepancies identified in a survey are linked to ordinary business activities and the assessee supplies specific explanations of source and nexus, the deeming provisions for unexplained investments and unrecorded ownership do not automatically apply; accordingly the higher-rate taxation applicable to incomes classified as deemed income is inapplicable and the amounts are treated as business income for tax purposes.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Redemption fine reduction for restricted imports emphasises proportionality in customs penalty and valuation disputes practice.
    Valuation of imported used multifunction machines was reassessed by a Chartered Engineer, supporting an enhanced customs value while prompting scrutiny of their classification as restricted and the legal basis for detention. The Tribunal evaluated confiscation limits and applied proportionality in monetary sanctions, reducing the imposed penalty and redemption fine to specified proportions of the enhanced value, thereby illustrating judicial discretion in balancing enforcement with fairness in customs adjudication.
    Case LawsService Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Delay in tax adjudication undermines statutory timeframe and can violate principles of natural justice, affecting taxpayers' rights.
    Inordinate delay in adjudicating a service tax show cause notice raised whether such delay contravened the statutory timeframe under Section 73 and violated principles of natural justice; the delay of about a decade, despite an early response by the taxpayer, was characterised as inordinate and prejudicial, inconsistent with the statutory aim of prompt determination and established precedents requiring proceedings to conclude within a reasonable period.
    Case LawsCorporate Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Secured creditor priority upheld; asset protection costs initially borne by creditors and rival claims sent to the specialized tribunal for adjudication.
    The court transferred disputes over assets of a company in liquidation to the specialized insolvency tribunal for expedited adjudication, affirmed the priority of secured creditors while permitting other claimants to present possessory or contractual claims before the tribunal, and ordered that interim asset protection expenses be initially borne by secured creditors but remain recoverable as part of their claims.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Surplus stock classification: accounting linkage to business determines treatment as business income over unexplained investment.
    Classification of surplus stock found during a section 133A survey depends on its nexus with ordinary trading and documentary accounting. Where excess inventory is recorded in the stock register and credited to partners' capital account, these accounting entries indicate it forms part of regular business stock and support treatment as business income rather than unexplained investment under section 69B, affecting applicability of special tax treatment under section 115BBE.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    GST reimbursement entitlement affirmed for contract wide transactions, requiring payment with statutory interest and retrospective calculation.
    The court construed amended contract clauses to cover GST impact on both direct and indirect transactions, concluding that the implementing agency's cessation of reimbursements and retrospective recoveries breached contractual promises and principles of promissory estoppel and Article 14, giving rise to an entitlement to reimbursement of withheld GST sums with statutory interest and a court directed timeline for calculation and payment.

    TMI Notes

    Back

    All TMI Notes

    Showing Results for :
    Reset Filters
      No Records Found

      TMI Notes

      Back

      All TMI Notes

      whatsappJoin Channel
      Showing Results for : Reset Filters

      Amendment in Faceless Assessment under section 144B of the Act

      1 February, 2022

      Contents
      Plus +
      Summary
      Note

      Note

      -

      Bookmark

      Print

      Print

      Amendment in Faceless Assessment under section 144B of the Act

      The Central Government has undertaken a number of measures to make the processes under the Act electronic, by eliminating person to person interface between the taxpayer and the Department to the extent technologically feasible, and provide for optimal utilisation of resources and a team-based assessment with dynamic jurisdiction. As part of this policy, vide Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020, section 144B was inserted in the Act to provide the procedure for faceless assessment with effect from 01.04.2021 and the Faceless Assessment Scheme, 2019 ceased to operate from that date.

      2. However, various difficulties are being faced by the administration and the taxpayers in the operation of the faceless assessment procedure. In view of the above, it is proposed that the existing provisions of the section 144B of the Act may be amended to streamline the process of faceless assessment in order to address the various legal and procedural problems being faced in the implementation of the said section.

      3. Therefore, it is proposed to substitute section 144B of the Act so as to provide that––

      (a) the provisions of the proposed section shall apply for faceless assessment, reassessment or recomputation under sub-section (3) of section 143 or under section 144 or under section 147 of the Act, as the case may be, in the cases specified therein.

      (b) the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NaFAC) shall assign the case selected for the purposes of faceless assessment to a specific Assessment Unit (AU) and intimate the assessee that assessment in his case shall be completed in accordance with the procedure laid down in the proposed section.

      (c) the assessee shall be served a notice under sub-section (2) of section 143 or under sub-section (1) of section 142 of the Act, through the NaFAC. The assessee may file his response to the aforementioned notice under sub-section (3) of section 143, within the date specified in such notice in this regard, to the NaFAC, which shall forward the reply to the AU.

      (d) Thereafter, the AU may make a request, through the NaFAC, for obtaining such further information, documents or evidence from the assessee or any other person, as it may specify and the NaFAC shall serve appropriate notice or requisition on the assessee or any other person for obtaining such information, documents or evidence. The AU may also make a request, through the NaFAC, for conducting enquiry or verification by Verification Unit (VU) and the request shall be assigned by the NaFAC to a VU through an automated allocation system. The AU may also similarly make a request in respect of determination of arm’s length price, valuation of property, withdrawal of registration, approval, exemption or any other technical matter by referring to the technical unit and the request shall be assigned by the NaFAC to a Technical Unit (TU) through an automated allocation system.

      (e) The assessee or any other person, as the case may be, shall file his response in compliance to the said notice served by NaFAC, at the request of AU, to the NaFAC which shall forward the reply to the AU. If the assessee fails to comply with the said notice seeking information served by NaFAC, or the earlier notice under sub-section (2) of section 143 or under sub-section (1) of section 142, the NaFAC shall intimate the same to the AU. The AU shall serve upon the assessee, through NaFAC, a show cause notice under section 144 giving him the opportunity to explain as to why the assessment in his case should not be completed to the best of its judgement. Further any report received by the NaFAC, from the VU or TU shall also be forwarded to the AU.

      (f) The assessee shall file his response to the show-cause notice under section 144 of the Act, within the time specified in such notice, to the NaFAC which shall forward the same to the AU. If the assessee fails to respond, the NaFAC shall intimate the same to the AU.

      (g) The AU shall, after taking into account all the relevant material available on the record, prepare in writing, an income or loss determination proposal where no variation prejudicial to assessee is proposed and send the same to the NaFAC.

      If a variation is being proposed then a show cause notice is served on the assessee stating the variations proposed to be made to the income of the assessee and calling upon him to submit as to why the proposed variation should not be made, through the NaFAC.

      (h) The assessee shall file his reply to the show cause notice to the NaFAC, on date and time as specified, which shall forward the reply to the AU. If the assessee fails to respond within the specified time, the NaFAC shall intimate the same to the AU. After considering the response of the assessee or the intimation of failure of the assessee to file a response received from NaFAC and all relevant material available on the record, the AU shall prepare an income or loss determination proposal, in writing, and send the same to the NaFAC.

      (i) Upon receipt of the income or loss determination proposal, with or without any variations proposed to the income of the assessee, as the case may be, the NaFAC may, on the basis of guidelines issued by the Board, convey to the AU to prepare draft order in accordance with such income or loss determination proposal, which shall thereafter prepare a draft order, or assign the income or loss determination proposal to a Review Unit (RU) through an automated allocation system, which shall conduct a review of such order, prepare a review report and send it to NaFAC.

      (j) The NaFAC shall forward the review report received from the RU to the AU which had proposed the income or loss determination proposal. The AU may accept or reject some or all of the modifications proposed in such review report, prepare a draft order accordingly, and send it to NaFAC. The AU shall record reasons in writing if it is rejecting the modifications proposed by the RU.

       (k) The NaFAC shall, upon receiving draft order in a case of eligible assessee, where there is a proposal to make any variation which is prejudicial to the interest of such assessee under sub-section (1) of section 144C for reference to Dispute Resolution Panel, serve such draft order on the assessee. In any case, other than that of eligible assessee under section 144C, the NaFAC shall convey to the AU to complete the assessment in accordance with such draft order, which shall thereafter pass the final assessment order and initiate penalty proceedings, if any, and send it to the NaFAC. The NaFAC shall serve a copy of such final assessment order, notice for initiating penalty proceedings, if any and the demand notice, specifying the sum payable by, or refund of any amount due to the assessee on the basis of such assessment, to the assessee.

      (l) An eligible assessee, as referred to in section 144C, shall, upon receiving the draft order as served on him above, shall file his acceptance of the variations proposed in such draft order or file objections, if any, to such variations, with the Dispute Resolution Panel, under section 144C and the NaFAC, within the period specified in sub-section (2) of section 144C.

      (m) In case the variations proposed in the draft order are accepted by the assessee or not objected to within the time given in sub-section (2) of section 144C, the NaFAC shall intimate the AU of the same, which shall complete the assessment, on the basis of the draft order, within the time allowed under sub-section (4) of section 144C and initiate penalty proceedings, if any, and send the order to the NaFAC.

      (n) Where the eligible assessee files objections with the Dispute Resolution Panel, against the variations proposed in the draft order in his case, the NaFAC shall send such intimation along with a copy of such objections to the AU. Upon receipt of the directions issued by the Dispute Resolution Panel in the case of an eligible assessee under section 144C, the NaFAC shall forward such directions to the AU. The AU shall complete the assessment within the time allowed in sub-section (13) of section 144C and initiate penalty proceedings, if any, in conformity with the directions issued by the Dispute Resolution Panel under sub-section (5) of section 144C, and send a copy of such order to the NaFAC.

      (o) The NaFAC shall, upon receipt of final assessment order, in the case of an eligible assessee under section 144C or in other cases, serve a copy of such order and notice for initiating penalty proceedings, if any, on the assessee, along with the demand notice, specifying the sum payable by, or the amount of refund due to, the assessee on the basis of such assessment. The NaFACshall, after completion of assessment, transfer all the electronic records of the case to the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over the said case for such action as may be required under the Income-tax Act.

      (p) The proposed section also provides that faceless assessment shall be made in respect of persons or class of persons, or incomes or class of incomes, or cases or class of cases or such territorial area, as may be specified by the Board.

      (q) The proposed section also provides that Board may, for the purposes of faceless assessment, set up the following Centre and units and specify their functions and jurisdiction, namely:-

      (i) a National Faceless Assessment Centre to facilitate the conduct of faceless assessment proceedings in a centralised manner;

      (ii) assessment units (referred to as AU), as it may deem necessary to conduct the faceless assessment, to perform the function of making assessment, which includes identification of points or issues material for the determination of any liability (including refund) under the Act, seeking information or clarification on points or issues so identified, analysis of the material furnished by the assessee or any other person, and such other functions as may be required for the purposes of making faceless assessment and the term “assessment unit”, wherever used in this section, shall refer to an Assessing Officer having powers to the extent so assigned by the Board; ;

      (iii) verification units (referred to as VU), as it may deem necessary to facilitate the conduct of faceless assessment, to perform the function of verification, which includes enquiry, cross verification, examination of books of account, examination of witnesses and recording of statements, and such other functions as may be required for the purposes of verification and the term “verification unit”, wherever used in this section, shall refer to an Assessing Officer having powers so assigned by the Board;:

      Further, the function of verification unit under this section may also be performed by a verification unit located in any other faceless centre set up under the provisions of this Act or under any scheme notified under the provisions of the Act and the request for verification may also be assigned through the National Faceless Assessment Centre to such verification unit.;

      (iv) technical units (referred to as TU), as it may deem necessary to facilitate the conduct of faceless assessment, to perform the function of providing technical assistance which includes any assistance or advice on legal, accounting, forensic, information technology, valuation, transfer pricing, data analytics, management or any other technical matter under this Act or an agreement entered into under sections 90 or 90A, which may be required in a particular case or a class of cases and the term “technical unit”, wherever used in this section, shall refer to an Assessing Officer having powers so assigned by the Board;

      (v) review units (referred to as RU), as it may deem necessary to facilitate the conduct of faceless assessment, to perform the function of review of the income determination proposal assigned under sub-clause (b) of clause (xix) of sub-section (1), which includes checking whether the relevant and material evidence has been brought on record, relevant points of fact and law have been duly incorporated, the issues on which addition or disallowance should be made have been incorporated and such other functions as may be required for the purposes of review and the term “review unit”, wherever used in this section, shall refer to an Assessing Officer having powers so assigned by the Board.

      (r) It is also proposed that the AU, VU, TU and the RU shall have the following authorities, namely:-

      (i) Additional Commissioner or Additional Director or Joint Commissioner or Joint Director, as the case may be;

      (ii) Deputy Commissioner or Deputy Director or Assistant Commissioner or Assistant Director, or Income-tax Officer, as the case may be;

      (iii) such other income-tax authority, ministerial staff, executive or consultant, as considered necessary by the Board.

      (s) The proposed section also provides that all communication, among the AU, RU, VU or TU or with the assessee or any other person with respect to the information or documents or evidence or any other details, as may be necessary for the purposes of making a faceless assessment shall be through the NaFAC, between the NaFAC and the assessee, or his authorised representative, or any other person and all internal communications between the NaFAC and various units shall be exchanged exclusively by electronic mode. However, this provision shall not apply to the enquiry or verification conducted by the verification unit in the circumstances as may be specified by the Board in this regard.

      (t) It is further proposed that for the purposes of faceless assessment, an electronic record shall be authenticated by the NaFAC by way of an electronic communication, by the AU or VU or TU or RU, as the case may be, by affixing digital signature and by the assessee or any other person, by affixing his digital signature or under electronic verification code, or by logging into his registered account in the designated portal. It is also proposed that every notice or order or any other electronic communication shall be delivered to the addressee, being the assessee, by way of placing an authenticated copy thereof in the registered account of the assessee or by sending an authenticated copy thereof to the registered email address of the assessee or his authorised representative or by uploading an authenticated copy on the assessee's Mobile App, and followed by a real time alert.

      (u) The proposed section further seeks to provide that the assessee shall file his response to any notice or order or any other electronic communication, through his registered account, and once an acknowledgement is sent by the NaFAC containing the hash result generated upon successful submission of response, the response shall be deemed to be authenticated. The time and place of dispatch and receipt of electronic record shall be determined in accordance with the provisions of section 13 of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

      (v) A person shall not be required to appear either personally or through authorised representative in connection with any proceedings before any unit set up under the proposed section.

      (w) Further, it is proposed that in a case where a variation is proposed in the income or loss determination proposal or the draft order, and an opportunity is provided to the assessee by serving a notice calling upon him to show cause as to why the assessment should not be completed as per such income or loss determination proposal, the assessee or his authorised representative, as the case may be, may request for personal hearing so as to make his oral submissions or present his case before the income-tax authority of the relevant unit. Where the request for personal hearing has been received, the income-tax authority of relevant unit shall allow such hearing, through NaFAC, which shall be conducted exclusively through video conferencing or video telephony, including use of any telecommunication application software which supports video conferencing or video telephony, to the extent technologically feasible, in accordance with the procedure laid down by the Board. Any examination or recording of the statement of the assessee or any other person (other than the statement recorded in the course of survey under section 133A) shall be conducted by an income-tax authority in the relevant unit, exclusively through video conferencing or video telephony, including use of any telecommunication application software which supports video conferencing or video telephony, to the extent technologically feasible, in accordance with the procedure laid down by the Board.

      (x) It is proposed that the Board shall establish suitable facilities for video conferencing or video telephony including telecommunication application software which supports video conferencing or video telephony at such locations as may be necessary, so as to ensure that the assessee, or his authorised representative, or any other person is not denied the benefit of faceless assessment merely on the consideration that such assessee or his authorised representative, or any other person does not have access to video conferencing or video telephony at his end. The Principal Chief Commissioner or the Principal Director General, as the case may be, in charge of the NaFAC shall, with the prior approval of the Board, lay down the standards, procedures and processes in the specified manner for effective functioning of the NaFAC and the units set up, in an automated and mechanised environment.

      (y) The proposed section also seeks to provide that if at any stage of the proceedings before it, the AU having regard to the nature and complexity of the accounts, volume of the accounts, doubts about the correctness of accounts, multiplicity of transactions in the accounts or specialized nature of business activity of the assessee, and the interests of the revenue, is of the opinion that it is necessary to do so, it may, upon recording its reasons in writing, refer the case to the NaFAC stating that the provisions of sub-section (2A) of section 142 may be invoked in the case. The Principal Chief Commissioner or the Principal Director General, as the case may be, in charge of the NaFAC shall, in accordance with the procedure laid down by the Board in this regard, if he considers appropriate that the provisions of sub-section (2A) of section 142 may be invoked in the case, forward the reference received from the AU to the Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner or Commissioner having jurisdiction over such case, and inform the AU accordingly. Such case shall also be taken up for transfer to the jurisdictional Assessing Officer with the approval of the Board. Where a reference has been received the Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner or Commissioner, having jurisdiction over such case, he shall direct the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over such case to invoke the provisions of sub-section (2A) of section 142. However, where a reference has not been forwarded to the Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner or Commissioner, having jurisdiction over such case, the AU shall proceed to complete the assessment in accordance with the procedure laid down in the proposed section.

      (z) It is also proposed to provide that the Principal Chief Commissioner or the Principal Director General, as the case may be, in charge of National Faceless Assessment Centre may, at any stage of the assessment, if considered necessary, transfer the case, in addition to a case referred to in (y) to the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over such case, with the prior approval of the Board. It is also proposed to define the terms such as electronic verification code, assessment unit, technical unit, verification unit, review unit etc used in the proposed section.

      This amendment will take effect from 1st April, 2022.

      (II) Sub-section (9) of section 144B of the Act provides that the assessment proceedings shall be void if the procedure mentioned in the section was not followed. The said sub-section refers to violation of the procedure laid down by the law whereas a large number of disputes have been raised under this subsection involving technical issues arising due to use of information technology, leading to unnecessary litigation. It is, therefore, proposed to omit this subsection i.e., sub-section (9) of section 144B from its date of inception.

      This amendment will take effect retrospectively from 1st April, 2021.

      [Clause 42]

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax