Month: July 2008

Archive for July, 2008


In Re Rescuwear Corporation (Settlement Commission Full Bench)

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: July 30, 2008 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

U/s 245A(b), as amended by the Finance Act 2007 w.e.f. 1.6.2007, “pendency of proceedings for assessment” before the AO for one or more assessment years is a necessary condition for invoking the jurisdiction of the Settlement Commission. Held in that context by Five Member Bench of the ITSC

Posted in All Judgements, Others

CIT vs. Star Chemicals (Bombay High Court)

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: July 30, 2008 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

It is clear from the reading of Section 36 (1) (vii) and Circular No. 551 dated 23rd January, 1990 that if the assessee has written off the debt as bad debt, that would satisfy the purpose of the Section.

Posted in All Judgements, High Court

Manoj Aggarwal vs. DCIT (ITAT Delhi 5 Member Spl Bench)

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: July 28, 2008 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

It is a precondition to invoking s. 158BD that the AO must, in the course of s. 158BC proceedings, record satisfaction that the income belongs to the other person. In the absence of such finding, s. 158BD cannot be invoked. The satisfaction must be objective and not subjective. It must be recorded before jurisdiction is exercised. Even though no time limit is prescribed, there is an implied time limit for giving such finding i.e. the period prescribed in s. 158BE for framing the s. 158BC assessment

Posted in All Judgements, Tribunal

Gangadharan vs. CIT (Supreme Court)

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: July 23, 2008 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

merely because in some cases the revenue has not preferred appeal that does not operate as a bar for the revenue to prefer an appeal in another case where there is just cause for doing so or it is in public interest to do so or for a pronouncement by the higher Court when divergent views are expressed by the Tribunals or the High Courts.

Posted in All Judgements, Supreme Court

Deepak Agro Foods vs. State (Supreme Court)

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: July 19, 2008 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

Where the High Court was satisfied that the assessment order had been back-dated and directed that a fresh order be passed by a different AO and the assessee filed an appeal arguing that the assessment proceedings should have been declared null and void, held:

 

(a) All irregular or erroneous or even illegal orders cannot be held to be null and void as there is a fine distinction between the orders which are null and void and orders which are irregular, wrong or illegal. Where an authority making order lacks inherent jurisdiction, such order would be without jurisdiction, null, non est and void ab initio as defect of jurisdiction of an authority goes to the root of the matter and strikes at its very authority to pass any order and such a defect cannot be cured even by consent of the parties. However, exercise of jurisdiction in a wrongful manner cannot result in a nullity – it is an illegality, capable of being cured in a duly constituted legal proceedings.

Posted in All Judgements, Supreme Court

Steel Authority vs. STO (Supreme Court)

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: July 19, 2008 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

Where the Appellate Commissioner disposed of the appeal by a non-reasoned order, held that a statutory appeal could not be disposed of in that manner. Reason is the heartbeat of every conclusion. It introduces clarity in an order and without the same it becomes lifeless. Failure to give reasons amounts to denial of justice.”

Posted in All Judgements, Supreme Court

CIT vs. Oriental Insurance (Supreme Court)

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: July 19, 2008 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

Where the High Court dismissed the appeals filed against a PSU on the ground that an application for permission of the COD had not been obtained within the period of 30 days as laid down in ONGC’s case, held that there was actually no rigid time frame indicated by the Supreme Court. The emphasis on one month’s time was to show urgency needed.

Posted in All Judgements, Supreme Court

Valvoline Cummins vs. DCIT (Delhi High Court)

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: July 1, 2008 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

In accordance with Instruction No.96 dated 21st August, 1969 issued by the CBDT where the income determined is substantially higher than the returned income, that is, twice the latter amount or more, then the collection of tax in dispute had to be held in abeyance till the decision on the appeal is taken

Posted in All Judgements, High Court

Shri. Ranjeet Singh vs. ACIT (ITAT Delhi)

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: July 1, 2008 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

Where the assessee was assessed at Delhi but a notice u/s 148 was issued by the AO in Ghaziabad and the assessee had protested the usurpation of jurisdiction from the beginning

Posted in All Judgements, Tribunal