CBDT clarifies Instruction on issue of notice u/s 148 for instances considered as potential cases
F. No.225/40/2021/ITA-II
Government of India
Ministry of Finance
Department of Revenue
Central Board of Direct Taxes
New Delhi, the 12th March,2021
All Principal Chief Commissioners of Income-tax
Madam/Sir,
1. With reference to CBDT’s Instruction dated 04.03.2021 on the above-mentioned subject, it has been decided to clarify as under:
(a) The ‘potential cases’ at Point 1(iii) mean the cases flagged by the Directorate of Income-tax (Systems) subsequent to 04.03.2021. It is further clarified that the NMS cases flagged earlier will get subsumed in the new list.
(b) With respect to criterion at Point 1(v), it is clarified that ‘any other Income-tax Authority ‘ includes the Assessing Officer (A.O.) herself/himself. Further, the information received as per Point no. 1(v) shall not include information received from Directorate of Income-tax (Investigation), Central Charges and Directorate of Income-tax (Intelligence and Criminal Investigation ) after 01.04.2019.
(c) With respect to the condition at Point 1(v), that cases are to be considered as potential cases for issue of notice u/s,148 of the Act ‘with the approval of CCIT concerned’, it is clarified that the CCIT shall call for the list of the potential cases along with details and evidences from the Subordinate Authorities and shall, after careful examination , suggest to the A.O., the potential cases to be taken for consideration for action u/s 148 of the Act.
2. Subsequent to the issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the A.O. shall upload all the underlying documents relied upon and satisfaction recorded, in the ITBA Module for all category of cases in Para no. 1 of CBDT’s Instruction dated 04.03.2021.
3. This issues with the approval of Chairman, CBDT.
FCRA specifies list of purposes to be selected for which registration is applied. The Ministry of Home Affairs has notified…
Assessee was not liable to withhold tax at source u/s 40(a)(i) on cost-to-cost reimbursement made to parent company In a…
Temporarily blocking public access to Telegram App under section 69A of IT Act 2000 is not disproportionate - Delhi HC…
High Court explains the meaning of term ‘enterprise’ appearing in section 80IA to means a project or an undertaking owned…
Addition deleted as assessee was only a carrier of cash and the real owner had come forward owning the cash…
Lokayukta Police not an ‘intelligence and security’ organisation and hence not exempt from disclosure of information under RTI Act 2005…