S. 220 : Collection and recovery–Stay-Pendency of appeal before CIT( A) – AO cannot proceed mechanically in calling upon assessee to remit 20 per cent of demand without examining appropriateness of facts and circumstances of case- Order was set aside. [S. 132, 153A, 220(6)]
S. 220 : Collection and recovery–Stay–Appeal pending before CIT(A)-Assessee has given liberty to approach the AO to stay the demand. [S. 220(3), 220(6), 246A]
S. 194C : Deduction at source–Contractors-Placement fees/carriage fees – work contract and not fees for technical service. [S. 194J]
S. 154 : Rectification of mistake-Relief for income-tax-Arrears or advance of salary–Failure to claim in return–Rectification order passed by the AO is held to be without jurisdiction. [S.89(1)]
S. 151 : Reassessment-Sanction for issue of notice-Sanction order indicated non-application of mind to reasons recorded for reopening, therefore, reopening notice was bad in law and quashed. [S.147, 148]
S. 147 : Reassessment–With in four years- On the day of furnishing the recorded reasons–Reassessment order is passed -Order passed in hasty manner–Order is seta side. [S. 148]
S. 147 : Reassessment-Cash credits-Share application money-Huge premium-Genuineness of transaction or creditworthiness of individual providing money were apparently not established–Issue of reassessment notice is held to be justified.[S. 68, 148]
S. 147 : Reassessment–After the expiry of four years-Book profit-Subsidy received by assessee from Government was directly credited to capital reserve account-Sufficient disclosure of facts– Reassessment is held to be bad in law.[S. 115JB, 148]
S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years- Penny stock – Shares-No failure to disclose all material facts- Merely on basis of information received from Investigation Wing without conducting any independent enquiries. [S. 69A, 148]
S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years- Prior period expenses – Disclosed all material facts necessary for assessment-Initiation of reassessment proceedings merely on basis of change of opinion is not justified.[S. 37(1), 148]