Taxpublishers.in - InterestingDecision/IDDTF_275.htm - Tax Publishers Your Tax Solution Hub

Share via Whatsapp 138 Views


Tax Publishers Reassessment under section 147/148 subsequent to revision proceedings initiated twice under section 263 *Facts:* Assessee was in receipt of Share premium from certain parties. The series of events which happened in the assessment is as under. Thus reassessment proceedings were triggered under section 147 and 148 post facto two revision proceedings on the assessee on the same topic of receipt of share premium. The reassessment was challenged before the ITAT by the assessee with the plea that the ITAT had quashed the second revision proceeding as well besides that during pendency of a revision proceeding and there was no reason to reopen the case under reassessment thus two parallel proceedings for one assessment year was uncalled for. Held in favour of the assessee that during pendency of one revision proceeding there was no requirement to call for reassessment as well. On merits also the ITAT has quashed the second revision proceedings thus there was no point to trigger reassessment. *Applied:* S. M. Overseas Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (2023) 450 ITR 1 (SC) : 2022 TaxPub(DT) 8145 (SC) Trustees of HEH Nizam Supplemental Family Trust v. CIT (2000) 242 ITR 381 (SC) : 2000 TaxPub(DT) 1245 (SC). *Case:* Pearl Tracom (P) Ltd. v. DCIT 2023 TaxPub(DT) 7459 (Kol-Trib)

Tax Publishers

Reassessment under section 147/148 subsequent to revision proceedings initiated twice under section 263

Facts:

Assessee was in receipt of Share premium from certain parties. The series of events which happened in the assessment is as under.

Thus reassessment proceedings were triggered under section 147 and 148 post facto two revision proceedings on the assessee on the same topic of receipt of share premium. The reassessment was challenged before the ITAT by the assessee with the plea that the ITAT had quashed the second revision proceeding as well besides that during pendency of a revision proceeding and there was no reason to reopen the case under reassessment thus two parallel proceedings for one assessment year was uncalled for.

Held in favour of the assessee that during pendency of one revision proceeding there was no requirement to call for reassessment as well. On merits also the ITAT has quashed the second revision proceedings thus there was no point to trigger reassessment.

Applied:

S. M. Overseas Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (2023) 450 ITR 1 (SC) : 2022 TaxPub(DT) 8145 (SC)

Trustees of HEH Nizam Supplemental Family Trust v. CIT (2000) 242 ITR 381 (SC) : 2000 TaxPub(DT) 1245 (SC).

Case: Pearl Tracom (P) Ltd. v. DCIT 2023 TaxPub(DT) 7459 (Kol-Trib)