Year: 2020

Archive for 2020


Shri Jitendra Sharma v .JCIT ( Indore) (Trib) www.itatonline.org Shri Bharat Sharma v .JCIT ( Indore) (Trib) www.itatonline.org Shri Shatrughan Sharma v . JCIT ( Indore) (Trib) www.itatonline.org

S. 271C : Penalty – Failure to deduct at source – Non -resident – Short deduction of tax – levy of penalty is not justified when the assessee has deducted tax at source under S. 194IA instead of S 195 of the Act – Levy of penalty was deleted . [ S. 194IA ,195,201, 201(IA), 273B ]

Stratagem Portfolio (P.) Ltd. v . Dy. CIT ( Delhi ) (Trib) www.itatonline.org

S. 147 : Reassessment –With in four years- Client code modification- Reassessment notice is held to be bad in law. [ S. 68, 69C ,115BBE 143(1) 148 ]

B. Santoshamma v. D. Sarala ;MANU/SC/0698/2020 (SC) www.itatonline.org

Specific Relief Act 1963.
S.12 : Specific performance of part of Contract -The onus of proof lies on the party who makes an allegation- Time is not of essence to agreements for sale of immovable property, unless the agreement specifically and expressly incorporates the consequence of cancellation of the agreement, upon failure to comply with a term within the stipulated date. [ S. 10 11 (2) 14 , Limitation Act ,1963 , S 21(1) ]

Mangalnath Developers v. UOI ; MANU/MH/1274/2020 ( Bom) (HC) www.itatonline .org

Customs Act ,1962

S. 129A :Appeal -Appellate Tribunal – Limitation – The period of
limitation of three months commences from the date on which the order sought to be appealed against is communicated and not from the date of decision of the Committee of Commissioners. [ S.128A ,129 ,General Clauses Act, 1897 S.3 (35) Rule 12 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007, Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation of Certain Provisions) Ordinance, 2020 Art , 226 ]

ITO v . Savitri Kadur (Smt) ( Bang) (Trib) www.itatonline.org

S. 254(2): Appellate Tribunal-Rectification of mistake apparent from the record – Capital gains – Distribution of capital asset -Retirement – Amount credited to Partner’s capital account prior to retirement for goodwill whether taxable as capital gains with cost of acquisition as per sec. 55(2)(a) as NIL – Miscellaneous application of the revenue is dismissed [ S.45(4) 55(2)(a) ]

Vikas Strips Ltd v . DCIT ( Delhi) (Trib) www.itatonlinbe.org

S.147: Reassessment – Notice – Additional ground -AO can issue the notice u/s 143(2) only after filing of return of income in response to notice under section 148 of the Act – Prior issue of notice before such return is redundant therefore reassessment cancelled and quashed [ S.143(2) 148 151 292BB ]

Meena Gupta v. ITO ( Delhi )(Trib) www.itatonline .org Sheela Aggarwal v. ITO ( Delhi )(Trib) www.itatonline.org Garima Agarwal, v. ITO ( Delhi )(Trib) www.itatonline.org Shri Narender Kumar v. ITO ( Delhi )(Trib) www.itatonline.org Shri Hanuman Prasad v. ITO ( Delhi )(Trib) www.itatonline.org Shri Gaurav Aggarwal v. ITO ( Delhi )(Trib) www.itatonline.org Shri Sourav Jindal v. ITO ( Delhi )(Trib) www.itatonline.org

S.147: Reassessment – Information from investigation wing – Objections not disposed – Material not confronted with the reasons recorded – Reassessment notice was quashed .[ S.148 ]

Dipesh Ramesh Vardhan v.DCIT ( Mum) (Trib) www.itatonline.org Ramesh Babulal Vardhan v.DCIT ( Mum) (Trib) www.itatonline.org Manju Ramesh Vardhan v.DCIT ( Mum) (Trib) www.itatonline.org Vishal Ramesh Vardhan v.DCIT ( Mum) (Trib) www.itatonline.org Rajesh Babulal Vardhan v.DCIT ( Mum) (Trib) www.itatonline.org

S. 45: Capital gains – Bogus capital gains from penny stocks- The AO has not discharged the onus of controverting the documentary evidences furnished by the assessee and by bringing on record any cogent material to sustain the addition as cash credits – Entitle to exemption- Addition as estimated commission income also deleted . [ S.10(38) 68 ]

Soni Sonu (Smt.) v. ACIT ( Delhi) (Trib) www.itatonline.org

S.45: Capital gains -Family settlement – The amount received on re-alignment of shareholding pursuant to family settlement arrangement is held to be liable to capital gains tax- on facts Owelty be claimed as part of family settlement is not exempt from capital gains tax [ S.2 (47) 47 ]

Vijaykumar Satramdas Lakhani v. CBDT ( 2020) 195 DTR 121/ 317 CTR 249/ (2021) 276 Taxman 470 ( Bom) (HC) www.itatonline.org

S. 197 : Deduction at source – Certificate for lower rate – Order of rejection application was quashed – An ordinance made by the President is not an executive act- Power to promulgate ordinance is legislative in nature.-Directed the Assessing officer to decide the application on merit with in period of six weeks . [Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation of Certain Provisions) Ordinance, 2020 , S 3, S. 119 , Art , 226 ]