Section 158B

Section 158B — the law in short

What the courts have decided on section 158B, in one screen. Read this first; open an entry when you need the facts, the reasoning and the source.

• Saroj Kumar Sahoo v National Faceless Assessment Centre High CourtHelps departmentValidity unconfirmed
  My scrutiny assessment was still running when they searched me in November 2024. Section 158BA(2) says a pending assessment abates. Can I have the assessment order quashed in a writ on that ground alone?
  Not on that ground alone. The Orissa High Court accepted that a search initiated on or after 1 September 2024 puts the case in the revived block assessment regime of Chapter XIV-B and that s.158BA(2) abates a pending assessment for any year in the block period, but it refused to quash the order because nothing on the record showed that the search had unearthed any undisclosed income of this petitioner, and it relegated him to his appeal.
• Commissioner of Income Tax v Girish Chaudhary High CourtHelps taxpayer
  A loose sheet seized in the search has bare figures on it and the officer has read '48' as Rs 48 lakhs of undisclosed income. Can that stand without anything more?
  No. The Delhi High Court upheld the deletion of the Rs 48 lakh addition. There was no material on record to show on what basis the officer concluded that the figure 48 was to be read as Rs 48 lakhs. Following the Supreme Court in CBI v V.C. Shukla, a file of loose sheets is not a book of account, so entries in it are not admissible under section 34 of the Evidence Act, 1872, and the seized annexure was a dumb document leading nowhere. The Court endorsed the Tribunal's view that it was for the Revenue to put life into the document by collecting other relevant and connected material, which it had not done. The appeal was dismissed.

Listed strongest first: Supreme Court, then High Court, then Tribunal, then CBDT. Nothing here has yet been read in full by a chartered accountant — open an entry to see where it came from.