Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13 (0.20 seconds)Section 153C in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 153A in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 148 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Arun Kumar Telang,, Durg(Cg) vs Ito, Ward- 4,, Bhilai(Cg) on 17 August, 2018
"7. On having gone through the decisions cited above
especially the decision of Amritsar Bench in the case of ITO vs.
Arun Kumar Kapoor (supra), we find that in that case as in the
present case before us, reassessment was initiated on the basis of
incriminating material found in search of third party and the
validity of the same was challenged by the assessee before the
Learned CIT(Appeals) and the Learned CIT(Appeals) vitiated the
proceedings. The same was questioned by the Revenue before the
ITAT and the ITAT after discussing the cases of the parties and
the relevant provisions in details has come to the conclusion that
in the above situation, provisions of sec. 153C were applicable
which excludes the application of sections 147 and 148 of the
Act. The ITAT held the notice issued under sec. 148 and
proceedings under sec. 147 as illegal and void ab initio. It was
held that Assessing Officer having not followed procedure under
sec. 153C, reassessment order was rightly quashed by the
Learned CIT(Appeals). In the present case before us, it is an
admitted fact, as also evident from the reasons recorded and the
assessment order that the initiation of reopening proceedings was
made by the Assessing Officer on the basis of information
received from the Directorate of Income-tax (Inv.) on the basis of
search & seizure operation conducted at the premises of Rock
Land Group of Cases and the documents related to the assessee
found during the course of search were made available to the
Assessing Officer of the present assessee.
Section 132A in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 132 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Dcit, Circle-62(1), New Delhi vs Sanjay, New Delhi on 7 September, 2018
We thus respectfully
following the decision of Co-ordinate Bench of the ITAT in the
case of ACIT vs. Arun Kapur - 140 TTJ 249 (Amritsar) hold that
provisions of sec. 153C of the Act were applicable in the present
case for framing the assessment, if any, which excludes the
application of sec. 147 of the Act, hence, notice issued under sec.
148 of the Act and assessment framed in furtherance thereto
under sec. 147 read with section 143(3) of the Act are void ab
initio. The reassessment in question is accordingly quashed. The
ground No.1 is accordingly allowed."
Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Buildwell Assam (P.) Ltd. on 11 November, 1980
7. It is contended by the ld. AR for the assessee that this
additional ground could not be raised due to inadvertence which
was neither willful nor intentional. The ld. DR for the Revenue
opposed the application for additional ground on the ground that
the assessee has first time raised this ground which is not
permissible under law. Ld. DR for the Revenue also relied on the
judgments in cases of CIT vs. Manish Buildwell (P.)