2016 (4) TMI 258 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Commissioner of Income Tax –VIII, Chennai Versus Shri M. Hemanathan
Revision orders u/s 263 - order passed against a dead person - Held that - The contention of the Department loses sight of one important distinction between a case where the proceedings are initiated against a person, who is alive, but continued after his death and a case of proceedings initiated against a dead person himself. If the proceedings had been initiated against a person, who was alive, and they were continued after his death after putting his legal heirs on notice, those proceedings, under certain circumstances, may be saved. Such a situation is also contemplated in civil proceeding ....... - .......
2016 (3) TMI 719 - ITAT KOLKATA
M/s Emerald Company Ltd. Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward 11 (1) , Kolkata
Revision u/s 263 - whether order passed by the ld. CIT on the dead person is not valid? - Held that - As find from reply letter dated 27-01-2015 before the ld.CIT in response to show cause notice issued u/s 263 of the Act, the assessee herein had specifically brought to the notice of the ld. CIT that M/s. The Bond Company Ltd was merged with the assessee herein. Hence, we find that the assessee has duly discharged its onus of intimating the revenue officials about the fact of merger of the said company. In these circumstances, the ld. CIT ought to have taken cognizance of the same and should h ....... - .......
2015 (12) TMI 505 - ITAT DELHI
Income Tax Officer Versus Kushal Timber Pvt Ltd
Reopening of assessment - officer jurisdiction to issue the notice - Held that - The words used in Section 147 of the Act are the Assessing Officer and which clearly means a particular officer who has the jurisdiction, over the case of a particular assessee. It is not the case that the statute has mandated every Assessing Officer to exercise jurisdiction, as per his own sweet will. As per the mechanism provided u/s 124 of the Act, the jurisdiction over the case of the appellant assessee could have been exercised either by the DCIT, Circle 5(1), Delhi, with whom the return of income for the A.Y ....... - .......
2015 (9) TMI 756 - DELHI HIGH COURT
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) -I Versus CHETAN GUPTA
Reopening of assessment - Whether the ITAT was correct in holding that since notice under Section 148 was not served on the Assessee in accordance with law, the re-assessment made consequent thereto was without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed? - Held that - Under Section 148 of the Act, the issue of notice to the Assessee and service of such notice upon the Assessee are jurisdictional requirements that must be mandatorily complied with. They are not mere procedural requirements. - For the AO to exercise jurisdiction to reopen an assessment, notice under Section 148 (1) has to be mandator ....... - .......
2015 (9) TMI 965 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi Versus Soni Associates Pvt. Ltd.
Non service of notice under Section 143(2) - Held that - The Court finds that the question of law stands covered against the Revenue by the decision of the Supreme Court in ACIT v. Hotel Blue Moon (2010 (2) TMI 1 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) where the Supreme Court has categorically held that the service of the notice under Section 143(2) of the Act upon the person to whom it is addressed is mandatory requirement. For the purposes of Section 282 (1) of the Act, it is seen that unless the person upon whom the notice was served is an agent empowered to accept service , in terms of Order V Rule 12 C ....... - .......
2015 (11) TMI 646 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad Versus Shri Mangal Singh
Validity of assessment in the status of HUF - Held that - The fact that the assessee himself had filed the return in the status of HUF coupled with the provisions of Section 292BB of the Act, the Tribunal was not right in declaring the assessment order as non-est. - In view of the above, ....... - .......
2015 (9) TMI 184 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
Hasmukhbhai K. Barot Versus ACIT, Cir. 3, Surat.
Validity of assessment order passed under section 158BD - notice issued under section 158BD was issued upon a deceased person - Held that - Section 159(2) nowhere authorize the AO to take proceeding against the individual who has already expired, that is why the legal representative under section 2(7) are regarded to be assessee. This aspect can also appreciated by an example, viz. an assessee died leaving behind four legal representatives. The AO issued notice on the deceased. One of the legal representatives participated in the proceedings and the AO passed assessment order. All the four leg ....... - .......
2015 (8) TMI 620 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3 Noida Versus M/s. Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority
Reopening of assessment - requirement of issuance of notice - exemption claimed by the assessee under Section 10(20) was not tenable as it was not a local authority within the meaning of Section 10(20) - ITAT allowed assessee s appeal - Held that - It is clear that the essential requirement is issuance of notice under Section 143(2) of the Act. The deeming fiction under Section 292BB of the Act is with regard to service of notice . Since the initial requirement of issuance of notice was not made by the Assesssing Officer, the deeming fiction of service of notice under Section 292BB of the Act, ....... - .......
2015 (8) TMI 226 - ITAT BANGALORE
The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Versus M/s. Ashed Properties and Investments Pvt. Ltd.
Validity of reopening of assessment - non service of notice u/s. 143(2) before completion of the assessment u/s. 147 - DR relied on the provisions of section 292BB of the Act and submitted that non-issue of notice u/s. 143(2) within the time specified under the proviso to sec. 143(2)(ii) will not render the order of reassessment null and void - Held that - The two provisos in sub-section (1) to section 148 has been inserted with retrospective effect from 1st October, 1991. The gist of the two provisos may suitably be stated thus- Where a return has been furnished daring the period commencing o ....... - .......
2015 (7) TMI 601 - ITAT BANGALORE
Shri H. Lakshminarayana Versus The Income Tax Officer, Ward 2 (3) , Bangalore
Penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - interest so earned by the assessee had not been offered to tax by the assessee in the returns of income filed for A.Ys. 2004-05 to 2008-09. Similarly, the assessee also did not declare interest received on SB account for A.Ys. 2004-05 to 2008-09 - Held that - The show cause notice u/s. 274 of the Act is defective as it does not spell out the grounds on which the penalty is sought to be imposed. In our view, the aforesaid defect cannot be said to be curable u/s. 292BB of the Act, as the defect cannot be said to be a notice which is in substance and effect in conformity ....... - .......
2015 (7) TMI 83 - ITAT DELHI
M/s New Okhla Industrial Development Authority Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Noida
Reopening of assessment - whether the assessment framed without issuing the notice u/s 143(2) of the Act is a valid assessment? - Held that - Where notice u/s 143(2) of the Act is not issued to the assessee before framing the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act, the AO does not have the jurisdiction to make the assessment. In the present case, the AO issued the notice u/s 148 of the Act and the assessee furnished the return of income in response to the said notice. Thereafter the AO asked the assessee to furnish certain details by issuing the questionnaire u/s 142(1) of the Act but nowhere issued ....... - .......
2015 (6) TMI 6 - ITAT JAIPUR
M/s. Mundra Woolen Mills (P) Ltd. Versus The ACIT Circle- 2, Ajmer
Restoration of original appeal - Rule 10 of Income Tax Rules regarding filing of affidavit - Claim of unlawful survey proceedings - A crude attempt to influence independent judgment process for petty professional ends - Held that - It may be pertinent to mention that ld. Counsel Shri K C Moondra FCA and Mukul Moondra ACA, seem to be ignorant about filing a proper power of attorney, which is to be given on a NON JUDICIAL stamp paper. Whereas they have filed a plain printed paper with ₹ 10/- court fee stamp which is not a valid and prescribed power of attorney. Thus their appearance could ....... - .......
2015 (6) TMI 328 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Commissioner of Income Tax, Udaipur Versus Shri Bhuvnesh Maheshwari
Notice under Section 143(2) - CIT(A) arrived at the conclusion that no notice under Section 143(2) was served upon the assessee on or before 30.9.2010, therefore, the process under the provision aforesaid was impermissible - Held that - So far as service upon Shri Bherulal said to be an employee of the assessee is concerned, it is pertinent to notice that by way of filing an affidavit Shri Bherulal stated on oath before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that he was not in service with the assessee after 12.11.2008 and was not in touch with the assessee and never visited business place a ....... - .......
2015 (3) TMI 795 - ITAT LUCKNOW
Sardar Balbir singh Versus Income Tax Officer Kanpur
Reopening of assessment - issuance of Notice u/s 148 r.w.s 151(2) - Sanction for issue of notice - Held that - Provisions of sub-section (2) of section 151 of the Act is to be applied for issuing notice under section 148 of the Act and as per sub-section (2) of section 151 of the Act, the Assessing Officer was required to obtain sanction/approval from the Jt. Commissioner of Income-tax and in the instant case, approval/sanction was obtained from the ld. Commissioner of Income-tax. Therefore, we have no hesitation in holding that the sanction accorded by the CIT(A) is not in accordance with law ....... - .......
2015 (2) TMI 733 - DELHI HIGH COURT
TULIP ENGINEERING PVT. LTD Versus INCOME TAX OFFICER
Validity of reopening of assessment - Held that - The reasons to believe recorded by the AO and duly communicated to the assessee had noted that its name figures as one of the beneficiaries of alleged bogus transactions, which had cropped up during the investigation carried out by the Directorate of Investigation, Jhandewalan. The entries relating to the transactions and the sums of money were also included in tabular statement as part of the note. CIT v. M/s Kelvinator of India Ltd, (2010 (1) TMI 11 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ) states that the reassessment can be resorted to if there is tangibl ....... - .......