#Section 148A

ITAT Kolkata held that reassessment beyond three years under Section 148 mandates PCCIT or CCIT sanction under Section 151; PCIT approval is jurisdictionally invalid. The tribunal quashed a notice where only PCIT approval was obtained, reinforcing the strict hierarchy for time-barred proceedings and protecting taxpayers from procedurally flawed orders.

The Bombay HC quashed reassessment for AY 2020-21, ruling a Section 148A(1) notice invalid where mandatory information was furnished post-limitation. On merits, the Court held Section 56(2)(x) inapplicable to proportionate rights allotments with unchanged shareholding and no disproportionate benefit - a mere issue price vs. FMV differential is not taxable in such cases.

Supreme Court set aside a Rajasthan High Court order quashing a Section 148 reassessment notice, restoring the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Jaipur’s jurisdiction to re-examine the case under the Faceless Assessment Scheme. The ruling clarifies that appellate jurisdiction under the Act remains distinct from writ jurisdiction, impacting reassessment proceedings pending before ITAT.

Kolkata ITAT quashed reassessment notices under Section 148A for failing to provide the mandatory 7-day compliance period and unsigned notices, reinforcing strict procedural safeguards in tax reassessment. The ruling underscores the importance of adherence to statutory timelines for notices issued under the Income Tax Act, impacting future reassessment proceedings.

ITAT Mumbai rules that the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) must independently adjudicate both the condonation of delay in filing appeals and the validity of reassessment proceedings under Section 148A of the Income Tax Act. The order sets aside the CIT(A)'s failure to apply this dual-test standard, restoring the appeal for fresh consideration and reinforcing procedural safeguards in tax disputes.

The Karnataka High Court quashed an income tax assessment against an agricultural co-operative society for failing to afford it a hearing on its claim for exemption under Section 80P, reinforcing that procedural fairness is non-negotiable even in faceless assessments. The ruling mandates that tax authorities must entertain substantive claims under special exemptions before finalizing assessments, protecting cooperative societies from arbitrary demand notices and bank freezes.

ITAT Delhi rules that reassessment notices issued under the pre-amendment Section 148 of the Income Tax Act after 01.04.2021 are invalid due to procedural non-compliance. The tribunal relies on the precedent in Sumanjeet Aggarwal v. ITO, emphasizing that the new scheme under Section 148A must be strictly followed. This decision impacts taxpayers facing reassessment proceedings initiated under the old regime post-amendment.

ITAT Mumbai rules that issuing two reassessment orders under Section 147 for the same transaction in a single assessment year is legally impermissible. The second order renders the first infructuous, setting a precedent against procedural duplication in tax reassessment proceedings.

ITAT Delhi sets aside an ex-parte assessment order under Sections 148A and 144 of the Income Tax Act, ruling that non-receipt of the order by the assessee constitutes reasonable cause for delay in filing an appeal. The Tribunal directed a fresh assessment with a fair hearing opportunity, reinforcing natural justice principles in tax proceedings.

Madras High Court rules that income tax notices and assessments issued to a deceased assessee are legally void if proceedings are not initiated against legal heirs under Section 159(2) of the Income Tax Act. The court held there is no statutory obligation on legal heirs to inform the department of the assessee's death, shifting the burden to the tax authority to correctly identify and proceed against the legal representative.

ITAT Agra rules that reassessment notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act on or after 01-04-2021 must strictly comply with the amended Section 148A procedure. Failure to do so renders the notice invalid, quashing the entire reassessment proceedings. This decision reinforces procedural safeguards for taxpayers against arbitrary reopening of assessments.

ITAT Delhi quashes reassessment proceedings where the Assessing Officer introduced fresh grounds in the 148A(d) order that were absent in the original notice under Section 148A(b). The ruling reinforces that reassessment cannot be a fishing expedition and must strictly comply with statutory procedure to uphold natural justice for taxpayers.

Calcutta High Court sets aside reassessment notice for lack of reasoning, affirming that mere extraction of reply is insufficient-reasoned application of mind is mandatory under Section 148A.

ITAT Delhi quashes reassessment where notice under Section 148A(b) cited one set of entities, but addition was made on unrelated purchases. Key precedent on procedural fairness.