For the first time in a reassment proceeding u/s 147 , Supreme Court set in a procedure to be followed both by assessee and assessing officer when a notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act is issued. The Apex Court in GKN Driveshaft (India) Ltd vs ITO , 259 ITR 19 fixed the responsibility and perfect path to reassessment u/s 147. Facts Related to Reassessment Case under Section 147
Scrutiny of the case is done by officer of the rank of Income Tax Officer (ITO ) and Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (ACIT) ot Deputy Commissioner of Income tax. The jurisdiction has been distributed among these ranks as per return income. As per CBDT instruction , generally the ITOs have jursidiction over cases where return income is below Rs 10 lakhs whereas the jurisdcition of ACIT/DCIT are on all kinds of cases without any limit if return income.
Mumbai High court quashed the notice issued u/s 263 by commissioner of income tax to the Prudential Assurance Company Ltd on the ground that the decision of Authority in Advance Ruling given in another person can not be applied to any other person even if the said ruling by AAR is different on the same issue . As per provision of law, the rulings byAAR is binding on applicant ,...
Rs.98.70 crores. 4 5) Section 44 of the <b>Income</b> <b>Tax</b> <b>Act</b>, 1961 provides that notwithstanding anything contained to the contrary ... First schedule to the <b>Act</b>, <b>income</b> of life insurance business assessable under the <b>Income</b> <b>Tax</b>