S.148A Income Tax Act | Gujarat High Court Quashes Reopening Of Assessment, Says AO Conducted Roving Inquiry Despite Being Given All Details

The Gujarat High Court quashed proceedings reopening the assessment of a man whose income had allegedly escaped assessment, after noting that despite the assessee explaining all banking transaction details, the assessing officer had travelled beyond the law and conducted a roving inquiry. For context, Section 148A of the Income Tax Act pertains to conducting of inquiry by assessing officer before he issues notice to assesee in cases where income has escaped assessment. The petitioner...

Income Tax Act | Gujarat High Court Quashes S.153C Assessment As Time-Barred, Rejects Revenue's Reliance On S.153(6)(i)

The Gujarat High Court quashed assessment order as well as a demand notice issued to an entity under Section 153C Income Tax Act after noting that the assessment order was issued invoking Section 153(6)(i) was beyond the limitation period. The petitioner had moved the high court for quashing Assessment Order dated 30.04.2024 as well as the demand Notice dated 30.04.2024 for the Assessment Year 2011-12. It was contended that the assessment order passed by the respondent was clearly barred by...

Income Tax Act | Long Term Capital Gains Exemption Available Even If Residential House Was Demolished Before Sale: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court held that the Long-Term Capital Gains exemption under Section 54 of the Income Tax Act cannot be denied merely because the residential house was demolished before its sale. The bench stated that since the sale took place later and the assessee reinvested the capital gains in another house within the prescribed time, the exemption is allowable. Section 54 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, provides a Long-Term Capital Gains (LTCG) exemption when an individual or HUF...

Income Tax | Reopening Not Hit By Change Of Opinion If Earlier Proceedings Dropped Due To Lack Of Evidence: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court held that the mere reopening of an assessment under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act cannot be treated as a change of opinion if the earlier proceedings were dropped due to lack of evidence. Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury stated that on the basis of a change of opinion of the assessing officer, a notice under Section 148 of the said Act cannot be issued. For a case of change of opinion to be established an assessing officer must arrive at an opinion that there has...

S.153C Income Tax Act | Gujarat High Court Quashes Assessment Proceedings Citing 2-Yr Delay & Lack Of Date In 'Satisfaction Note'

The Gujarat High Court quashed a Section 153C Income Tax Act proceedings against a company after noting that the assessing officer's satisfaction note did not bear any date and that the note, though recorded in 2022 was "supplied" to the company only in 2024 i.e., after a delay of two years without any explanation. For context, Section 153C empowers the tax authority to assess the income of any person whose documents or assets are found during a search or seizure operation on a different...

Ignorance Of Indian Tax Law Not 'Genuine Hardship' To Condone Delay In Filing ITR: Delhi High Court Rejects Canadian Citizen's Plea

The Delhi High Court has held that ignorance of Indian tax laws doesn't constitute “genuine hardship” to condone delay in filing an Income Tax Return (ITR) under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.A division bench of Justices V. Kameswar Rao and Vinod Kumar thus rejected the plea of a Canadian citizen seeking such relief on ground of being unaware of Indian tax requirements and facing difficulties due to COVID-19 pandemic.For context, Petitioner had earned income taxable in India but...

20% Pre-Deposit Not Mandatory For Stay Of Demand, AO Must Exercise Discretion U/S 220(6) Income Tax Act: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has reiterated that deposit of 20% of the disputed tax demand is not mandatory for grant of stay, and that the Assessing Officer (AO) must independently exercise discretion under Section 220(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.A division bench of Justices V. Kameswar Rao and Vinod Kumar relied on National Association of Software and Services Companies (NASSCOM) v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption)Circle 2 (1), Delhi And Ors (2024) where it was held that 20%...

Income Tax Act | Centralisation Of Assessment U/S 127 Permissible Where Cases Are Inter-Linked: P&H High Court

The Punjab and Haryana High Court held that the transfer of assessment jurisdiction under Section 127 of the Income Tax Act is valid where cases are inter-linked, and centralisation is required for effective investigation and public interest. Section 127 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, grants the power to senior tax authorities to transfer a taxpayer's case from one Assessing Officer (AO) to another. Justices Deepaksibal and Lapita Banerji stated that in the absence of allegations...

Entity Recognised As Charitable Under Income Tax Act With S.12A Registration Cannot Be Treated Otherwise Under FCRA: Madras High Court

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has held that a trust already recognised as a charitable organisation under the Income Tax Act cannot be ignored as such while considering its application under the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010 (FCRA). A Single Judge Bench of Justice G.R. Swaminathan was dealing with a writ petition filed by Arsha Vidya Parampara Trust challenging the rejection of its FCRA registration by the Ministry of Home Affairs . The Bench stated that when ...

Income Tax Act | Delhi High Court Sets Aside Reassessment Against MakeMyTrip Over ₹50 Crore Receipt, Cites Vague S.148A Notices

The Delhi High Court has set aside reassessment proceedings initiated against MakeMyTrip India Pvt. Ltd., holding that the notices issued under Section 148A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 were unreasoned.A Division Bench of Justices V. Kameswar Rao and Vinod Kumar allowed the writ petition filed by the company, which had challenged the reassessment action relating to an alleged unexplained receipt of over ₹50 crore, purportedly arising from information obtained during a search conducted in the case...

Income Tax Act | Multiple Presentations Of Proposal For Reopening U/S 148 After Rejection Not Permissible: Uttarakhand High Court

The Uttarakhand High Court held that once a proposal for reopening an assessment under Section 148 is rejected by the competent authority, repeated representations of the same proposal are impermissible and without jurisdiction. Chief Justice G. Narendar and Justice Subhash Upadhyay examined whether the multiple presentations / repeated re-presentation of the proposal for initiation of proceedings under Section 148 to the Competent Authority under Section 151, is permissible under the...

120-Day Timeline In S.132B Income Tax Act For Deciding Assessee's Plea To Release Seized Assets Not Mandatory: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that the 120-day period prescribed under the second proviso to Section 132B(1)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for deciding an assessee's request for release of seized assets is not mandatory, and a decision taken beyond the said period does not automatically become invalid.A division bench of Justices V. Kameswar Rao and Vinod Kumar was dealing with a petition challenging the Income Tax Department's refusal to release jewellery seized during search proceedings under...