{"id":225158,"date":"2020-02-04T09:30:52","date_gmt":"2020-02-04T04:00:52","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=225158"},"modified":"2020-02-07T11:17:09","modified_gmt":"2020-02-07T05:47:09","slug":"bom-hc-decision-to-have-special-audit-under-s-1422-a-of-it-act-held-invalid-in-absence-of-pre-decisional-hearing","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/02\/04\/bom-hc-decision-to-have-special-audit-under-s-1422-a-of-it-act-held-invalid-in-absence-of-pre-decisional-hearing\/","title":{"rendered":"Bom HC | Decision to have special audit under S. 142(2-A) of IT Act held invalid in absence of pre-decisional hearing"},"content":{"rendered":"

Bombay High Court:\u00a0<\/strong>A Division Bench of Ujjal Bhuyan and Milind N. Jadhav, JJ., dismissed an appeal filed against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Pune, whereby it had set aside the decision of the Assessing Officer proposing to conduct special audit of the respondent-assessee under Section 142(2-A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.<\/p>\n

The assessing officer had submitted a proposal for a special audit under Section 142(2-A) to the administrative Commissioner. Pursuant thereto, the administrative Commissioner granted approval. The ITAT set aside the said decision holding that a show-cause notice was required to be given to the assessee by the Assessing Officer before making the order proposing conduct of special audit under Section 142(2-A). Aggrieved thereby, the Commissioner of Income Tax filed the instant appeal.<\/p>\n

The High Court relied on the Supreme Court decisions in\u00a0Rajesh Kumar v. CIT,\u00a0<\/em>(2007) 2 SCC 181<\/a> and\u00a0Sahara India v. CIT,\u00a0<\/em>(2008) 14 SCC 151<\/a> and observed that before forming an opinion as to the need for a special audit, having regard to the requirement of Section 142(2-A), a pre-decisional hearing has to be given by the Assessing Officer to the assessee. Even thereafter when the question of approval is before the approving authority. The latter is also required to comply with the principles of natural justice. Therefore, in both the stages contemplated under Section 142(2-A), principles of natural justice are required to be followed.<\/p>\n

Moreover, vide the Finance Act, 2007 (w.e.f. 1-6-2007), a proviso was added to Section 142(2-A), and following the said amendment, it is now a statutory requirement that the Assessing Officer has to provide reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee before directing the assessee to get the accounts audited under the said provision.<\/p>\n

In such view of the matter, the High Court held that in the absence of pre-decisional hearing, the decision to have special audit was invalid and consequentially, all the proceedings conducted thereafter stood vitiated. The Court found no infirmity in the order of the ITAT and the appeal was held devoid of merits. [CIT v. Vilson Particle Board Industries Ltd.,\u00a02020 SCC OnLine Bom 183<\/b><\/a>, decided on 27-1-2020]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Bombay High Court:\u00a0A Division Bench of Ujjal Bhuyan and Milind N. Jadhav, JJ., dismissed an appeal filed against the order of the <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":74381,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[30953,39469,39468,39470],"class_list":["post-225158","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-itat","tag-pre-decisional-hearing","tag-section-1422-a-of-it-act","tag-special-audit"],"yoast_head":"\nBom HC | Decision to have special audit under S. 142(2-A) of IT Act held invalid in absence of pre-decisional hearing | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/02\/04\/bom-hc-decision-to-have-special-audit-under-s-1422-a-of-it-act-held-invalid-in-absence-of-pre-decisional-hearing\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Bom HC | Decision to have special audit under S. 142(2-A) of IT Act held invalid in absence of pre-decisional hearing\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Bombay High Court:\u00a0A Division Bench of Ujjal Bhuyan and Milind N. Jadhav, JJ., dismissed an appeal filed against the order of the\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/02\/04\/bom-hc-decision-to-have-special-audit-under-s-1422-a-of-it-act-held-invalid-in-absence-of-pre-decisional-hearing\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2020-02-04T04:00:52+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2020-02-07T05:47:09+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1331\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/02\/04\/bom-hc-decision-to-have-special-audit-under-s-1422-a-of-it-act-held-invalid-in-absence-of-pre-decisional-hearing\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/02\/04\/bom-hc-decision-to-have-special-audit-under-s-1422-a-of-it-act-held-invalid-in-absence-of-pre-decisional-hearing\/\",\"name\":\"Bom HC | Decision to have special audit under S. 142(2-A) of IT Act held invalid in absence of pre-decisional hearing | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/02\/04\/bom-hc-decision-to-have-special-audit-under-s-1422-a-of-it-act-held-invalid-in-absence-of-pre-decisional-hearing\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/02\/04\/bom-hc-decision-to-have-special-audit-under-s-1422-a-of-it-act-held-invalid-in-absence-of-pre-decisional-hearing\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2020-02-04T04:00:52+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2020-02-07T05:47:09+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/02\/04\/bom-hc-decision-to-have-special-audit-under-s-1422-a-of-it-act-held-invalid-in-absence-of-pre-decisional-hearing\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/02\/04\/bom-hc-decision-to-have-special-audit-under-s-1422-a-of-it-act-held-invalid-in-absence-of-pre-decisional-hearing\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/02\/04\/bom-hc-decision-to-have-special-audit-under-s-1422-a-of-it-act-held-invalid-in-absence-of-pre-decisional-hearing\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg\",\"width\":1331,\"height\":887},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/02\/04\/bom-hc-decision-to-have-special-audit-under-s-1422-a-of-it-act-held-invalid-in-absence-of-pre-decisional-hearing\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Bom HC | Decision to have special audit under S. 142(2-A) of IT Act held invalid in absence of pre-decisional hearing\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Bom HC | Decision to have special audit under S. 142(2-A) of IT Act held invalid in absence of pre-decisional hearing | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/02\/04\/bom-hc-decision-to-have-special-audit-under-s-1422-a-of-it-act-held-invalid-in-absence-of-pre-decisional-hearing\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Bom HC | Decision to have special audit under S. 142(2-A) of IT Act held invalid in absence of pre-decisional hearing","og_description":"Bombay High Court:\u00a0A Division Bench of Ujjal Bhuyan and Milind N. Jadhav, JJ., dismissed an appeal filed against the order of the","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/02\/04\/bom-hc-decision-to-have-special-audit-under-s-1422-a-of-it-act-held-invalid-in-absence-of-pre-decisional-hearing\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2020-02-04T04:00:52+00:00","article_modified_time":"2020-02-07T05:47:09+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1331,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/02\/04\/bom-hc-decision-to-have-special-audit-under-s-1422-a-of-it-act-held-invalid-in-absence-of-pre-decisional-hearing\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/02\/04\/bom-hc-decision-to-have-special-audit-under-s-1422-a-of-it-act-held-invalid-in-absence-of-pre-decisional-hearing\/","name":"Bom HC | Decision to have special audit under S. 142(2-A) of IT Act held invalid in absence of pre-decisional hearing | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/02\/04\/bom-hc-decision-to-have-special-audit-under-s-1422-a-of-it-act-held-invalid-in-absence-of-pre-decisional-hearing\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/02\/04\/bom-hc-decision-to-have-special-audit-under-s-1422-a-of-it-act-held-invalid-in-absence-of-pre-decisional-hearing\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg","datePublished":"2020-02-04T04:00:52+00:00","dateModified":"2020-02-07T05:47:09+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/02\/04\/bom-hc-decision-to-have-special-audit-under-s-1422-a-of-it-act-held-invalid-in-absence-of-pre-decisional-hearing\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/02\/04\/bom-hc-decision-to-have-special-audit-under-s-1422-a-of-it-act-held-invalid-in-absence-of-pre-decisional-hearing\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/02\/04\/bom-hc-decision-to-have-special-audit-under-s-1422-a-of-it-act-held-invalid-in-absence-of-pre-decisional-hearing\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg","width":1331,"height":887},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/02\/04\/bom-hc-decision-to-have-special-audit-under-s-1422-a-of-it-act-held-invalid-in-absence-of-pre-decisional-hearing\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Bom HC | Decision to have special audit under S. 142(2-A) of IT Act held invalid in absence of pre-decisional hearing"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":218610,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/26\/del-hc-reopening-of-assessment-based-on-a-change-of-opinion-by-assessing-officer-held-vitiated-in-law-as-it-does-not-satisfy-legal-requirement-of-s-147-ita\/","url_meta":{"origin":225158,"position":0},"title":"Del HC | Reopening of assessment based on a change of opinion by Assessing Officer held vitiated in law as it does not satisfy legal requirement of S. 147 ITA","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"August 26, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court:\u00a0A Division Bench of S. Muralidhar and Talwant Singh, JJ. dismissed an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) opining that no substantial question of law arises. The issue sought to be urged by the Revenue was whether the ITAT\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":272209,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/25\/appropriate-high-court-itat-appeal-under-section-260a-income-tax-act-where-assessing-officer-situated-supreme-court-legal-research-tax-law-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":225158,"position":1},"title":"Appropriate High Court for filing an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act would be the one where the Assessing Officer is situated: Supreme Court","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"August 25, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cA judicial remedy must be effective, independent and at the same time certain. Certainty of forum would involve unequivocal vesting of jurisdiction to adjudicate and determine the dispute in a named forum.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/Appropriate-High-Court-for-filing-an-appeal-under-Section-260A-of-the-Income-Tax-Act-would-be-the-one-where-the-Assessing-Officer-is-situated-1.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/Appropriate-High-Court-for-filing-an-appeal-under-Section-260A-of-the-Income-Tax-Act-would-be-the-one-where-the-Assessing-Officer-is-situated-1.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/Appropriate-High-Court-for-filing-an-appeal-under-Section-260A-of-the-Income-Tax-Act-would-be-the-one-where-the-Assessing-Officer-is-situated-1.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/Appropriate-High-Court-for-filing-an-appeal-under-Section-260A-of-the-Income-Tax-Act-would-be-the-one-where-the-Assessing-Officer-is-situated-1.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/Appropriate-High-Court-for-filing-an-appeal-under-Section-260A-of-the-Income-Tax-Act-would-be-the-one-where-the-Assessing-Officer-is-situated-1.png?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":289103,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/04\/10\/it-act-reopening-of-assessment-unsustainable-in-law-lack-of-evidence-legal-research-legal-news-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":225158,"position":2},"title":"Reopening of the assessment is indemonstrable in law as reasons inserted in Section 147 IT Act were not considered as evidence: ITAT","author":"Editor","date":"April 10, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"It is a trite law that the reasons, as recorded for reopening the reassessment, are to be examined on a standalone basis to determine the validity of proceedings under section 147 IT Act.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT)","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-494.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-494.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-494.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-494.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":266694,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/05\/11\/can-mere-rejection-of-the-claim-by-assessing-officer-make-assessee-liable-for-penalty-itat\/","url_meta":{"origin":225158,"position":3},"title":"Can mere rejection of the claim by Assessing Officer, make assessee liable for penalty? ITAT explains","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"May 11, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi (ITAT): Addressing the issue, of whether mere rejection of the claim by an Assessing Officer would ipso facto make assessee liable for the penalty, the Bench of G.S. Pannu (President) and Kul Bharat (Judicial Member) held that it won\u2019t make the assessee liable to a\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/ITATAO.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/ITATAO.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/ITATAO.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/ITATAO.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/ITATAO.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":265775,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/04\/22\/whether-gift-received-from-huf-to-any-member-of-huf-is-exempt-from-taxable-income\/","url_meta":{"origin":225158,"position":4},"title":"Whether gift received from HUF to any member of HUF is exempt from taxable income? ITAT Explains","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"April 22, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh (ITAT): The Coram of Sanjay Garg (Judicial Member) and Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member) examined the issue as to the taxability of the amount of gift received by the assessee from his 'HUF'. An appeal was preferred by the assessee against the Principal Commissioner of Income\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Income Tax Appellate Tribunal","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/ITAT.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/ITAT.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/ITAT.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/ITAT.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/ITAT.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":260282,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/19\/can-merely-disowning-bank-accounts-to-income-tax-department-exempt-assessee-from-paying-tax\/","url_meta":{"origin":225158,"position":5},"title":"Can merely disowning bank accounts exempt assessee from paying tax? Read why ITAT approved addition of Rs 12.81 Crores under S.68 of Income Tax Act","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"January 19, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), New Delhi: Stating that, \u201cUrgent needs invite urgent action\u201d, Amit Shukla, Judicial Member and Dr B.R.R. Kumar, Accountant Member while addressing a very significant matter wherein assessee did not disclose the two bank accounts operated by him to the Income Tax Department, expressed that, Merely\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Income Tax Appellate Tribunal","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/ITAT.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/ITAT.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/ITAT.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/ITAT.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/ITAT.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/225158","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=225158"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/225158\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/74381"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=225158"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=225158"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=225158"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}