“Section 127(2)(b)”
The decision most relied on for Section 127(2)(b) is P.V. Doshi v. CIT (113 ITR 22), cited in 179 judgments on BharatTax.
Leading authorities on Section 127(2)(b)
The lack of jurisdiction to initiate reassessment proceedings under Section 147/148 cannot be waived and can be challenged at a later stage, even if not raised initially. An invalid reassessment due to such jurisdictional defects cannot sustain subsequent penalty proceedings.
When the valuation of closing stock is adjusted to include CENVAT or Modvat credit under Section 145A, a corresponding adjustment must also be made to the opening stock.
When the Assessing Officer revalues the closing stock, the opening stock must also be revalued on the same basis to ensure consistency in the method of accounting and proper computation of business income.
An appellate tribunal ought to remand a matter rather than set aside assessments entirely when jurisdiction is in question.
The Assessing Officer cannot discard the assessee's method of accounting without recording reasons to do so under Section 145 of the Income Tax Act.
The duty to disclose material facts necessary for assessment, fully and truly, is confined by Explanation 1 to the relevant section. This principle applies across various provisions of the Income-tax Act.
A loan or advance received by an assessee cannot be treated as such for the relevant previous year if it was not advanced by the lender during that year, even if there was an opening credit balance.
Expenditure incurred by a company to maintain its status as a company, rather than for earning specific income like dividends, cannot be allocated for disallowance under Section 14A.
