“Section 4(3)(b)”
The decision most relied on for Section 4(3)(b) is Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal (444 ITR 1), cited in 524 judgments on BharatTax.
Leading authorities on Section 4(3)(b)
Notices issued under the unamended Section 148 of the Income-tax Act between April 1, 2021, and May 4, 2022, must be treated as notices issued under the new Section 148A(b) of the amended law. This requires the Assessing Officer to follow the procedure prescribed under the amended reassessment provisions, including issuing an order under Section 148A(d) before a fresh notice under Section 148.
An unretracted admission of undisclosed income made by an assessee in a sworn statement under Section 132(4) during a search and seizure operation forms a valid basis for making additions and levying tax, especially when no books of accounts are maintained.
The Revenue is bound by the rule of consistency and cannot adopt a divergent position in a subsequent assessment year unless there is a change in facts or law.
This Supreme Court decision is cited as authority in search and seizure assessment proceedings.
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.
Procedural irregularities, especially where initiation was valid but completion was flawed, are often curable and may not automatically invalidate an entire order. This principle, tied to natural justice, means minor defects in procedure can be remedied without voiding the proceedings.
Profits of a business are computed under the head 'Profits and Gains of Business or Profession' and then reduced by specific receipts mentioned in Explanation (baa) to Section 80HHC. This means that for the purposes of Section 80HHC, only profits computed under the business head are considered, with subsequent adjustments for specified receipts.
An appellate authority can admit additional legal grounds for the first time, even if not raised earlier, provided these grounds are purely legal, go to the root of the matter, and the relevant facts for their adjudication are already on record.
