Month: December 2019

Archive for December, 2019


Kumar Rajaram v. ITO (IT) (2019) 267 Taxman 65 / (2020)423 ITR 185 (Mad) (HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Capital gains-Payments made to charitable institutions and expenditure towards execution of property–Rightly allowed as deduction by the AO-Revision is held to be not valid. [S. 45, 48. 143(3)]

PCIT v. Kesoram Industries Ltd. (2019) 181 DTR 236/109 taxmann.com 390 / 310 CTR 599/(2020)423 ITR 180 (Cal.)(HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue– Addition to fixed assets–Disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act-Enquiries done by the AO in the original assessment proceedings-Revision is held to be bad in law. [S. 14A, R. 8D]

CIT v. Kamal Galani (2018) 95 taxmnn.com 261 (Guj.)(HC) Editorial : SLP of revenue is dismissed; CIT v. Kamal Galani (2019) 267 taxman 114 (SC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Introduction of capital-Loan from brother–NRI for two years-after detailed the AO has accepted the capital and loan as genuine-Revision is held to be not justified. [S. 69A]

S. C. Naregal v. CIT (2019) 418 ITR 455/ 267 Taxman 563/ 311 CTR 849/ 184 DTR 247 (SC) Editorial : Decision in CIT v. S.C. Naregal (2010) 329 ITR 615 (Karn.) (HC) is set aside because of low tax effect, leaving the questions of law open.

S. 260A : Appeal-High Court–Monetary limits–Pendency of appeals-No cascading effect nor issue involved in group matters-Appeals of department is dismissed–Question is kept open. [S. 268A]

Piramal Glass (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2019) 102 taxmann.com 176/176 DTR 134 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 254(2) : Appellate Tribunal–Rectification of mistake apparent on record-Where the issue before the Tribunal was of allowability of deduction, it was incorrect to remand the matter with a direction to apply transfer price provisions-AO had already passed the order, pursuant to such remand, and deleted the addition accordingly the writ petition had become academic. [S. 36(1)(iii), S. 92C, 254(1), Art. 226]

CIT v. Reham Foundation. (2019) 418 ITR 205 / 311 CTR 756 / (2020) 268 Taxman 372 (FB) (All.)(HC)

S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal-Powers-Registration–Interpretation – Powers of Tribunal are co -extensive to that of Commissioner – Tribunal can direct the Commissioner to grant the registration without reamnding matter to Commissioner. . [S.12A, 12AA]

Ultratech Cement Ltd. v. CIT (2019) 266 Taxman 390 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 234C : Interest-Deferment of advance tax–Demerger of the unit–Not justified in levying the interest for period before acquisition of cement business by assessee-Interest is directed to be waived. [S. 119(2), Art. 226]

Aarti Sponce & Power Ltd. v. ACIT (2019) 418 ITR 257 (Chhatisgarh)(HC)

S. 225 : Collection and recovery-Stay of proceedings–Disputed demand-Deposit of 20 percent tax of demand is not a condition precedent-Directed to pass reasoned order. [S. 226, Art. 226]

Sapana Charudatt Ranadive v. ITO (2019) 418 ITR 193 / 181 DTR 127 / 310 CTR 432 / 266 Taxman 4 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 222 : Collection and recovery-Certificate to Tax Recovery Officer-Attachment and sale of immovable property-Limitation-Attachment of immovable property in 1997-Proclamation of sale in February, 2019-Barred by limitation. [Sch. II R. 68B. Art. 226]

Hinal Estates (P.) Ltd. v. UOI (2019) 266 Taxman 411 / 184 DTR 297/(2020) 314 CTR 549(Bom.)(HC)

S. 222 : Collection and recovery-Certificate to Tax Recovery Officer-Amalgamation-Tax Recovery Officer could not seek recovery of taxes of reassessment from assessee-company inasmuch as assessee neither had been served with notice of reopening of assessment, nor had any occasion to participate in such reassessment proceedings. [S. 147, 148, Art. 226]