“notice under section 148”

Yogesh Goyal, Dhamtari vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Raipur-1, Raipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our observations hereinabove,

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

other income which has escaped assessment and which, comes to his notice during the course of the proceedings. However, if after issuing a notice under section 148, he accepted the contention of the assessee and holds that the income which he has initially formed a reason to believe had escaped ... escaped assessment, it is not open to him independently to assess some other income. If he intends to do so, a fresh notice under section 148 would be necessary, the legality of which would be tested in the event of a challenge by the assessee. 9. According to the principle

Dhirubhai R. Patel, Na vs. Arivs.ITO, Ward-2, Navsari

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhआ.अ.सं./Ita No.190/Srt/2019 (Ay 2012-13) (Hearing In Physical Court) Dhirubhai R Patel Income Tax Officer, Balwada, Hond, Taluka : Ward-2, Navsari Vs Chikli, Navsari-396521 Pan No: Bsepp 9971 J अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Ms. Chaitali Shah, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 27.04.2023 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 10.07.2023 Pronouncement Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh: 1. This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals),Valsad [For Short To As “Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 24.01.2019 For Assessment Year 2012-13, Which In Turn Arises From The Addition Made By The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Navsari / Assessing Officer In Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 28.12.2017. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well As Law On The Subject, The Learned Assessing Officer Has Erred In Reopening The Assessment U/S 147 Of The Act After Issuing Notice U/S 148. Dhirubhai R Patel 2. Even Otherwise The Learned Assessing Officer Has Erred In Passing The Order U/S 147 By Making The Addition When He Did’Nt Make Any Addition On Issues Pertaining To The Reasons Recorded U/S 148(2) Of I.T. Act.

information, the Assessing Officer was of the view that income of assessee has escaped assessment. The Assessing Officer after recording reasons and issued notice under section 148 dated 24.03.2017. In response to notice under section 148, the assessee filed his return of income for assessment year

Shri Harbans Singh Mann, Mansa vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1 (4), Mansa

In the result, the ground no

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.129/Asr/2022 Assessment Year: 2010-11

impugned order held that where Joint Commissioner recorded satisfaction in mechanical manner and without application of mind to accord sanction for issuing notice under section 148, reopening of assessment was invalid - Whether Special Leave Petition filed against impugned order was to be dismissed - Held, yes” and ACIT, Circle

Shri Amarjeet Singh Bhatia, Raipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 3(1), Raipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our observations hereinabove

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

where the assessee has not filed return originally u/s 139(1) of the Act. In such a case, the Assessing Officer can issue notice under section 148(1) of the Act, asking the assessee to file the return and in that situation, if the assessee does not call in question ... jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer issuing the notice under section 148(1) before the expiry of the time allowed by the notice, such proceedings and reassessment made thereafter is protected on the question of jurisdiction, but in the present case, undisputedly, return of income was originally filed by the assessee

Shri Vijay Kumar Singhla, Mansa vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Amritsar

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

fact that the assessment was framed by the Assessing Officer after due application of mind and verification of issue referred to in the notice under section 148 of the Act to his satisfaction in accordance with law. Therefore, finding of the Worthy Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Amritsar that

Anjani Logistics Private Limited, Vapi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Vapi

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Anjani Logistics Private Limited, I.T.O., 301,302 Shree Jalaram Complex, Nr. Ward-1, Vs. Development Credit Bank, Vapi- Vapi. 396191, Gujarat. Pan No. Aahca 8368 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

that the assessee has failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment within the meaning of Section 147. Notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act) was issued on 31/03/2016 after recording reasons. The Assessing Officer recorded that no return ... income was filed by assessee in response to notice under Section 148 of the Act. The Assessing Officer issued notice under Section 142(1) of the Act for seeking certain details which was taken on record. The Assessing Officer further noted that the assessee has not shown such share application/premium

Shri Anil Omprakash Mishra, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), Surat

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Virtual Hearing) Shri Anil Om Prakash Mishra, I.T.O., A-281, Shubham Bunglows, Sachin, Ward-1(2)(1), Vs. Surat-394230. Surat. Pan No. Ajnpm 7661 F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

under Section 271B vide order dated 27/06/2019. 3. Before levying penalty, the Assessing Officer recorded that in response to notice under Section 148 of the Act, the assessee filed his return of income declaring income of Rs. 4,76,200/-. The assessee was engaged in the business of job work ... learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr. DR) for the revenue. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that in response to notice under Section 148 of the Act, the assessee filed return of income showing profit at Rs. 4,76,200/-. The net profit was shown on the basis

Rajkamal Construction, Forth Songadh, Tapi vs. ITO, Ward-2, Bardoli, Surat

In the result, ground no.1, 2 and 4 of the appeal are allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Rajkamal Construction, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2, Opp. Paratha House, At Post: Bardoli. Vankvel, Tal: Forth Songadh, Dist: Tapi, 394670. Pan : Aahfr2719Q Appellant Respondednt

assessee to that extent has escaped assessment. The Assessing Officer after recording reasons for reopened the case of the assessee under section 147. Notice under section 148 dated 24.12.2008 was served on the assessee. The Assessing Officer recorded that neither assessee filed return of income nor furnished any reply