S. 148 : Reassessment – Find – Best procedure becoming used – Writ from the find is actually overlooked [S
AO issued a good reopening find towards floor that assessee company had reduced an amount of large amount to it is controlling director aside away from administrators remuneration and you may same would be to become disallowed under point 36(1)(ii). It was kept one to because the assessee got made sufficient disclosures throughout fresh review and you will based on same the analysis is actually complete and you can, after that, reopening observe given if there is assessee to possess subsequent research 12 months for the similar crushed/procedure try decrease toward floor from transform away from thoughts and you may exact same was recognized of the funds, following the same see, impugned reopening has also been to get put asid. [AY: 2007-2008]
S. 148 : Reassessment – See – Amalgamation off enterprises – Amalgamating team and you may amalgamated business functioning out of same address after amalgamation – Supply of Part 170(2) applicable- Participated in brand new reassessment legal proceeding – Observe and you will reassessment legal proceeding valid [S
The new assessee got built a domestic strengthening and you can recorded an excellent valuation statement in the course of the latest assessment, hence was given birth to acknowledged from the AO. Then, the brand new AO introduced the issue to another valuation officer and you will acquired his report, the importance as per which was somewhat greater than you to stated from the assessee’s valuation statement. Kept one other than depending on the newest valuation report, there can be zero separate applying of mind for brand new AO that could justify the newest reassessment. (An excellent.Y. 2003-04)
The latest see regarding reassessment wasn’t legitimate
Dismissing the latest petition the newest Court held one to a great writ petition up against an alerts under point 148 was not getting captivated when you look at the a regular style. New notice is challenged in case the issuing authority had no jurisdiction or if perhaps it absolutely was awarded not in the age limitation. In the event your ground regarding limit resided, the latest assessee you may increase like material till the skilled authority and perhaps not before courtroom. (AY.2011-12)
S. 148 : Reassessment – Notice – Assessee has directly to boost objections – Responsibility of Evaluating Administrator to adopt arguments – Incapacity to look at arguments – Count remanded [S. 147, Ways 226]
Allowing the new petition the newest Court held you to definitely even though the Evaluating Officer had a chance at the stage out-of dealing with new objections to confirm the newest assertion of assessee, and that visited the root of your matter, the guy overlooked the trouble taking a posture that the informative proposition could well be checked-out during the time of reassessment legal proceeding shortly after offering enough chance to the latest assessee. And also the Assessing Manager didn’t come with matter to suggest your assessee had made fee during the cash to help you S and you may thereafter, received a similar matter straight back through the real-date disgusting settlement setting. seniorfriendfinder price Number remanded to Evaluating Administrator.(AY. 2015-16)
Dismissing the latest petition the fresh Courtroom stored one for the activities and you may issues built, this new assessee must participate in the latest reassessment procedures less than part 147 because of the submission its data and you may proof to ascertain the instance. Immediately following merger having impression out of the workplaces, HCLP and you will HCLC, was running in the same premises. Subsequent, the acknowledgment of one’s see issued of the Assistant Administrator got perhaps not started disputed by assessee. Hence, section 170(2) was appropriate and sucsh ground could not be considered to have the purpose of quashing the entire procedures initiated around section 147. Actually towards the merits, the fresh Secretary Commissioner had built there is “need to believe” in view out of certain the fresh material based in the case of bought equipment out of common funds. This might perhaps not present people acceptable reason for the reason for assailing the notice provided less than point 148. (AY. 2005-06)
Category: Uncategorized