Month: October 2019

Archive for October, 2019


Mahaveer Yadav v. ITO (2019) 107 taxmann.com 379 / 265 Taxman 379 (Raj.)(HC) Editorial : SLP of the assessee is dismissed, Mahaveer Yadav v. ITO (2019) 265 Taxman 162 (SC)

S. 260A : Appeal-High Court–Dismissal of revive petition is held to be valid–Order of Appellate Tribunal is affirmed in absence of demonstrated perversity in the order of Tribunal its finding. [S. 254(1)]

Ajay Surendra Patel v. Dy.CIT (2019) 107 taxmann.com 221 / 265 Taxman 87 ( Guj) (HC) Editorial : SLP of revenue is dismissed, DCIT v. Ajay Surendra Patel. (2019) 265 Taxman 86 (SC)

S. 260A : Appeal-High Court–Recalling of its earlier judgment on ground that it contained some factual inadvertent error and judgements relied on without giving an opportunity to the petitioner–Held to be valid. [S. 179]

Kerala Cricket Association v. ACIT (2019) 265 Taxman 17 / 181 DTR 153/ 310 CTR 273 (SC)

S. 260A : Appeal–High Court-High Court disposed of appeals against order of reassessment merely on basis of its decision on issue of registration under S. 12A and not on merits-Order was to be set aside and, appeals were to be restored to file of High Court for disposal on merits. [S. 12A, 147, 148]

PCIT v. Alpana Bhartia (Smt.) (2019) 265 Taxman 18 (Mag)/ 182 DTR 245/ 311 CTR 732 (Karn.)(HC)

S. 254(2) : Appellate Tribunal-Rectification of mistake apparent from the record–The order passed under section 254(2) cannot be rectified nor amended by invoking sub-section (2) of section 254 once again-Repetitive applications under section 254(2) of the Act are not permissible. [S. 254(1)]

Rakesh P Sheth. v. ITC (2019) 265 Taxman 200 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 251 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)–Powers–Stay-Order of CIT(A) rejecting the stay application is set aside. [Art. 226]

PCIT v. Haldia Petrochemicals Ltd. (2019) 107 taxmann.com 434 / 265 Taxman 434 (Cal.)(HC) Editorial: SLP is granted the revenue, PCIT v. Haldia Petrochemicals Ltd. (2019) 265 Taxman 160 (SC)

S. 234B : Interest-Advance tax–Levy of interest is held to be justified-Except on income which arose from retrospective operation of any statute, decision, etc., because in those type of cases, assessee was unable to know and assess his income and pay advance tax.[S. 234C]

Vodafone India Ltd. v. CIT (TDS) (2019) 265 Taxman 98 (Bom.) (HC)

S. 220 : Collection and recovery-Assessee deemed in default- Stay-Recovered 38% of disputed tax amount-No special circumstances pointed out to permit revenue to carry out full recoveries–Pending disposal of appeal further recovery proceedings were stayed.

Keva Fragrances (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2019) 265 Taxman 20 (Mag.) (Bom.)(HC)

S. 220 : Collection and recovery-Assessee deemed in default– Stay–Recovery of demand is stayed on deposit of 20% of outstanding demand–Advance tax paid and tax deducted at source while filing the return should also be considered.

Gemini Engi-Fab Ltd. v. DCIT (2019) 265 Taxman 195 / 181 DTR 405 / 310 CTR 587 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 153C : Assessment-Income of any other person-Search-Pendency of writ petition the AO passed the assessment order-Directed to file an appeal and all contentions are left open. [Art. 226]

Rajendra. v. ITO (2019) 265 Taxman 223 (Karn.)(HC)

S. 153A : Assessment–Search-Not furnishing the reasons-Notice and assessment–Alternative remedy is available–Writ is held to be not maintainable.[Art. 226]