“Section 124(1)”
The decision most relied on for Section 124(1) is CIT v. S.G. Pgnatale (124 ITR 391), cited in 181 judgments on BharatTax.
Leading authorities on Section 124(1)
An Explanation to Section 9(1)(ii) of the Income Tax Act that widens the scope of the provision, rather than merely clarifying it, cannot be applied retrospectively to assessment periods prior to its effective date. Assessments must be made according to the law in force at the relevant time.
A penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) is not sustainable if the notice issued under Section 274 fails to specifically mention whether the charge relates to concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The Assessing Officer must specify the exact charge for the penalty to be valid.
When no specific statutory period of limitation exists, proceedings under Section 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Income-tax Act, particularly for payments to non-residents, must be initiated within a reasonable period of four years. This limitation also applies to consequential penalty proceedings under Section 271C.
When dealing with unaccounted transactions of purchase and sale, including those from an illegal business, only the profit or income earned from such sales can be assessed as undisclosed income and subjected to tax, not the entire sale proceeds.
Section 124(3) of the Income-tax Act, which restricts an assessee from objecting to an Assessing Officer's jurisdiction, applies only to disputes concerning territorial jurisdiction as conferred by Section 120(1) or (2). It does not apply to objections regarding the Assessing Officer's inherent jurisdiction to frame an assessment.
A penalty for concealment of income cannot be levied if an assessee files a revised return to buy peace and avoid litigation, and the revenue accepts this without objection.
An assessee cannot challenge the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer if an objection is not filed within the prescribed one-month period from the date of receiving a notice. Failure to raise a timely objection under Section 124 before the AO waives the right to dispute jurisdiction later.
For a valid assessment under Section 153C against an 'other person', the Assessing Officer's satisfaction note must explicitly identify seized documents or assets found during a search that specifically belong to that 'other person'. Mere association or relationship with the searched assessee, without specific findings of belonging documents or assets, is insufficient to assume jurisdiction.
