Delhi High Court Refuses To Condone 9-Month Delay By Assessee In Filing Revised Income Tax Return

The Delhi High Court has refused to condone a delay of 9-months by an assessee in filing his revised income tax return (ITR).A division bench of Justices V. Kameswar Rao and Vinod Kumar remarked,“Surely it should not take nine months to realize that initial ITR has some mistakes, which requires a revised return.”The Court was dealing with a plea against rejection of Petitioner's application under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 seeking condonation of delay of nine months in filing...

IT Act | Reassessment Cannot Be Used To Review Assessment When All Documents Were Earlier Disclosed: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has held that reassessment proceedings under Sections 148 & 148A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 cannot be initiated to re-open issues that were already scrutinized and accepted during the original assessment, observing that a mere change of mind on the part of the Assessing Officer does not constitute reason to believe nor permit reassessment. A Division Bench of Justice B.P. Colabawalla and Justice Amit S. Jamsandekar, while deciding a writ petition filed by the...

Income Tax Act | Reassessment Against Entity Converted Into LLP Is Void: Bombay High Court Sets Aside S.148 Notice Issued To Defunct Company

The Bombay High Court has set aside a reassessment notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against a company that had ceased to exist due to conversion into a Limited Liability Partnership (LLP), holding that reopening of assessment against a non-existent entity is “illegal and bad-in-law”. A Division Bench of Justice B.P. Colabawalla and Justice Amit S. Jamsandekar was hearing a writ petition filed by Erangal Comtrade and Consultancy LLP (successor of Erangal...

NFAC Doesn't Take Away Jurisdictional Assessing Officer's Power To Initiate Reassessment U/S 148 Income Tax Act: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) and Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO) have jurisdiction to issue reassessment notices under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.The position has been in dispute since introduction of the E-Assessment of Income Escaping Assessment Scheme, 2022, which led to the setting up of the National Faceless Assessment Centre with Faceless Assessing Officers.Petitioner-assessee argued that now, FAO alone has jurisdiction to...

Income Tax Reassessment Notice Generated On Last Day Of Limitation But Uploaded Next Day Due To Portal Glitch Is Time-Barred: Delhi HC

The Delhi High Court recently found time-barred, an income tax reassessment notice generated by the Department on the last day of the limitation window but, issued to the assessee only a day after.The limitation period in the case at hand expired on June 30, 2025 (inclusive).The Income Tax Department claimed that the notice was generated on June 30, 2025 at 21:14:46 and signed on June 30, 2025 at 21:16:15 however, due to a technical glitch, it was shared on the assessee's e-filing portal only...

Assessee Missed Hearing Due To Faulty VC Link & Hearing Email Sent At 3AM: Kerala High Court Quashes CIT(A) Order

The Kerala High Court has set aside an order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) after finding that the assessee missed the hearing due to the non-functional video-conference link (VC link) and because the hearing link was emailed at an odd hour, i.e., at 3:13 a.m. CDT (Central Daylight Time) while he was in the U.S. Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. stated that the assessee could not utilise the opportunities for reasons beyond his control. Therefore, the assessee can be...

Income Tax Act | Alternative Remedy No Bar When Reassessment Notice Lacks Jurisdiction U/S 148/149: Sikkim High Court

The Sikkim High Court stated that when the reassessment notice itself is illegal, issued without jurisdiction, or beyond the time limit prescribed under the Income Tax Act, the Court can directly examine the validity of the notice under Article 226, even though an appeal under the Act is otherwise available.A Single Bench of the Sikkim High Court, comprising Justice Meenakshi Madan Rai, held that the availability of an alternative statutory remedy does not bar the exercise of writ...

International Tax Cases Not Exempt From Faceless Reassessment Regime: Bombay High Court Quashes S.148 IT Act Notice

The Bombay High Court quashed the reassessment notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, stating that the reassessment notice did not follow the mandate that the Faceless Assessing Officer only has the jurisdiction to reopen the assessment and not the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer. It was further stated that even international taxation matters could be made subject to the faceless regime. A Division Bench comprising Justices B.P. Colabawalla and Amit S....

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Cannot Pass Ex-Parte Orders Without Recording Reasons For Denying Adjournment: Allahabad High Court

While hearing an appeal under S. 260A of the Income Tax Act, the Allahabad High Court has held that the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal cannot reject adjournment applications and pass ex-parte orders without recording reasons for such dismissal. It was held that if the Tribunal was allowed to do such a thing, it would hamper the right of the parties to a reasonable opportunity of hearing. “While inordinate delays in judicial decision making is not healthy and expeditious disposal of the...

Income Tax Act | Co-operative Societies Not Engaged In Banking Not Entitled To TDS Exemption U/S 194A(3)(iii): Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court has held that co-operative societies not engaged in banking are not entitled to TDS (Tax Deducted at Source) exemption under section 194A (3)(iii) of the Income Tax Act. Section 194A(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 provides exemptions from TDS on interest for certain persons or institutions. Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. was dealing with a petition challenging the Constitutional validity of the proviso to section 194A(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which imposed...

Income Tax Act | Interest On Loan Advanced To Company Not Deductible Against Salary Income: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court has held that a loan raised by mortgaging property and advancing to a company does not constitute business expenditure, and the interest is not deductible against salary income. The bench opined that unless expenditure is incurred in the course of the business or professional service, the assessee is not entitled to a deduction, merely due to it being incurred on the amount borrowed and advanced to the company. Justices D K Singh and Rajesh Rai K stated that...

Delhi High Court Raps Income Tax Dept For Over Two-Year Delay In Implementing ITAT Order; Directs Refund With Interest Within One Month

The Delhi High Court recently criticized the Income Tax Department for an over 2-year delay in implementing an ITAT order, directing it to reconsider the demand raised against an assessee.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and aShail Jain observed that the Income Tax Department must implement judicial orders with “alacrity” however in this case, it woke up only after the assessee moved the High Court to seek enforcement of the ITAT order passed back in January 2023.“The Court notes...