Stay abreast with the latest developments in the professional domain along with in-depth analysis through the monthly BCA Journal. Get access to an engaging library of researched publications from the BCAS stable.
Learn MoreBCAJ Brieficles are short-format, web-only articles on contemporary topics of professional importance that are open-for-all to read & share.
Explore BrieficlesExplore past issues of BCA Journal & indulge in a treasure trove of high-quality professional content across format of print, videos & learning events from the BCAS stable.
Learn MoreMonthly mouth-piece of BCAS, the BCA Journal is a leading publication that has been in continuous circulation for more than 55 years. Over the years the BCAJ has become synonymous with high-quality & authentic content across fields of finance, accounting, tax & regulatory matters. The BCAJ has wide circulation across India & commands huge respect amongst the Chartered Accountants` community.
Learn MoreFor queries, collaborations, and insights to forge, Drop a line, share thoughts, inquiries galore, At BCAJ, your messages, we eagerly explore.
Learn MoreAs part of our AI initiative, this audio summary presents the key points of the BCAJ in just 15 minutes. This well-rounded discussion serves as an ice-breaker, encouraging you to explore the full article or feature in detail from the journal.
Learn More66 PramilaMahadevTadkase vs. ITO
[2024] 468 ITR 275 (Kar)
A.Y.: 2016–17
Date of order: 7th December, 2023
Ss. 147, 148A(b), 148A(d) and 149 of ITA 1961
Reassessment — New procedure — Initial notice and order for issue of notice — Issue of notice after three years — Monetary limit — Assessee’s receipt of sale consideration as co-owner less than threshold limit of ₹50 lakhs — Initial notice and order quashed.
The assessee was issued an initial notice u/s. 148A(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for reopening the assessment of the A.Y. 2016–17 u/s. 147 on the grounds that the assessee sold a property. The assessee stated that she was a non-resident, that she and her husband purchased an immovable property in the year 1996 and sold it in the year 2015 for a total consideration of ₹69,30,000, that the tax at source was deducted by the purchaser and that because her husband did not have a Permanent Account Number, the corresponding tax deducted at source was uploaded to her Permanent Account Number.
The Karnataka High Court allowed the writ petition filed by the asses