These judgements are uploaded by our esteemed readers. If you have a judgement on an important topic that you would like to share with others, please use this form to upload it
Bajaj Auto Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (Bombay High Court)
Bombay High Court: S. 4 : Charge of income-tax-Capital or revenue-Sales Tax Incentive- Purpose test-Incentive for setting up industrial unit in backward area- Sales tax incentive under 1979 and 1983 Schemes is capital receipt, not chargeable to tax. [S. 28(i), 43B, 1979 Scheme, 1983 Scheme] For the assessment year 1987–88, Bajaj Auto Ltd. set up a new industrial… Read More ...
Kotak Family Foundation v. CIT(E) (Bombay High Court)
Bombay High Court: S. 11 : Income from property held for charitable or religious purposes -Delay in e-verification of audit report-Audit report in Form 10B filed in time- E-verification delayed due to COVID-Delay is not intentional -Delay of 101 or 254 days within permissible limit-Rejection of condonation against principles of substantive justice-Procedural lapses should not override substantive justice,… Read More ...
SANDEEP GARG versus SALES TAX OFFICER (Delhi High Court)
Delhi High Court: The Department sends automated e-mails and SMSs whenever anything is uploaded on the portal. If the taxpayer is not diligent in checking the portal & no reply to the Show Cause Notice is filed, the department cannot be blamed (i) A perusal of the screenshot shows that the reminder notice was clearly visible on 09th… Read More ...
Darshan Singh Parmar v. UOI (Bombay High Court)
Bombay High Court: Maharashtra Goods and Service Tax, Act, 2017 S. 73 : Demands and Recovery-Tax evasion- Reward for providing information related to tax evasions-Reward determined but not paid by the government-Reward scheme should be operated fairly and avoid frivolous objections-Government directed to pay the reward with interest in case of delay-Circular GR No.STA-2004/CR-103 Taxation-2 dt. 05-06-2007. [S.… Read More ...
Skytech Rolling Mill Pvt. Ltd. v. Joint Commissioner of State Tax Nodal (Bombay High Court)
Bombay High Court: Maharashtra Goods and Service Tax (MGST Act), 2017 S: 83 : Provisional attachment to protect revenue in certain cases-Cash credit accounts-Not a property of the account holder-Cannot be attached provisionally u/s 83- Directed to withdraw the attachment within 24 hours. [S.83(1), Art. 226] The petitioner’s cash credit account with ICICI Bank was provisionally attached under… Read More ...
PCIT v. Hans Chemicals Pvt. Ltd (Bombay High Court)
Bombay High Court: S. 268A : Appeal-Instructions-Circulars-Monetary limits-2 crores-Applicability of revised CBDT monetary limits (Circular No 3 of 2018 dt. 11-7-2028 (2018) 405 ITR 29 (St), Circular 9 of 2024 , dated 17th September, 2024, (2024) 468 ITR 1 (St.)-Exceptions Apply Prospectively -Pending Appeals Covered by revised threshold-Appeal of Revenue is dismissed. [S. 260A] In this case, the… Read More ...
Gokulakrishna v. DCIT (ITAT Chennai)
Chennai Tribunal: S. 45(4) : Capital gains-Distribution of capital asset-Dissolution of firm - Introduction of new partner-Amount received by existing partner for sacrificing his profit-sharing ratio-Realignment of share ratio - No transfer of asset - No capital gain taxable on relinquishment of share ratio-Post amendment, 2021, Finance Act, 2021. [S. 2(14), 2(47), 9B, 45] The assessee is… Read More ...
NICAF LLP v. ITO (ITAT Mumbai)
Mumbai Tribunal : S: 68 : Cash credits-Unexplained Credit-Conversion of Company to LLP-Capital Account-Accumulated Profits-Capital gains-Mere accounting entry, without actual monetary benefit to the partners, does not constitute payment for alleged Violation of Section 47(xiiib)(f)-Book Entry-No Actual Payment-Burden on AO-Addition is deleted. [S. 45, 47(xxib)(f), 115BBE, Limited Liability Partnership Act, 2008, S. 56, 57] NICAF LLP is engaged… Read More ...
Goldman Tapes Private Limited v. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai)
Mumbai Tribunal : S. 69A : Unexplained Investments-Unexplained Money- Demonetization-Deposit of cash-Business receipts-Recorded in Books –Acceptance of Specified Bank Notes (SBNs) prior to 31.12.2016 is not illegal-Addition is deleted. During assessment, the AO identified substantial cash deposits made during demonetization and sought clarification. The assessee stated the cash, in the form of Specified Bank Notes (SBNs), was received… Read More ...
M.K. Shelters v. ITO Ward (ITAT Mumbai)
Mumbai Tribunal : S. 153A : Assessment-Search-Alleged transfer of Development rights-Reassessment based on seized ledger account and third-party statement-No independent inquiry conducted by the AO-No evidence to link the assessee to the transaction-Addition is deleted. [S. 131, 147, 148, 153A, 153C] The assessee has been a dormant firm since 2003 and received a reassessment notice u/s 147 r/w… Read More ...