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
Pankaj Kailash Agarwal v. ACIT (Bombay High Court)
Bombay High Court: Requiring an assessee to pay more tax by denying deduction under Section 80-IC of the Act would be a case of ‘genuine hardship’ for the purpose of section 119(2)(b) of the Act. The power to condone the delay has been conferred to enable the authorities to do substantial justice and the authorities are expected to… Read More ...
PATHAPATI SUBBA REDDY (DIED) BY L.Rs. VERSUS THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COLLECTOR (LA) (Supreme Court)
Supreme Court: Condonation of delay On a harmonious consideration of the provisions of the limitation law and the law laid down by the Supreme Court, it is evident that: (i) Law of limitation is based upon public policy that there should be an end to litigation by forfeiting the right to remedy rather than the right itself;… Read More ...
ANNAPURNA B. UPPIN VERSUS MALSIDDAPPA (Supreme Court)
Supreme Court: (i) Once there was a registered partnership deed, there is no further document placed on record by the complainant-respondent No.1 regarding dissolution of the said registered deed which continued till the time when the investment was made by the complainant respondent No.1 on 21.05.2002 and hence the complainant respondent No.1 would be deemed to be… Read More ...
MUNJAL BCU CENTRE OF INNOVATION AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP V/s. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTIONS, CHANDIGARH (P&H High Court)
P&H High Court: (i) The submission of the Department that communication of the notice electronically would also include communication of notice by placing it on e-portal and that as the assessee had submitted his form himself on the said e-portal, a presumption can be drawn that he was having knowledge of the notice/reminders which were placed on the… Read More ...
PCIT v. Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd & Ors (Delhi High Court)
Delhi High Court : S. 153C : Assessment - Income of any other person - Search – Block period - The period of the “relevant assessment year” is to be calculated, to the date of receipt of the books of accounts, documents or assets seized by the jurisdictional AO of the non-searched person- Block periods would have to be… Read More ...
UNION OF INDIA VERSUS JAHANGIR BYRAMJI JEEJEEBHOY (Supreme Court)
Supreme Court: (i) It hardly matters whether a litigant is a private party or a State or Union of India when it comes to condoning the gross delay of more than 12 years. If the litigant chooses to approach the court long after the lapse of the time prescribed under the relevant provisions of the law, then… Read More ...
PURNI DEVI vs. BABU RAM (Supreme Court)
Supreme Court: S. 14(2) of the Limitation Act: Time spent bonafidely and diligently and in good faith before the wrong forum is bound to be excluded when computing limitation before the Court having competent jurisdiction Section 14(2) of the Limitation Act carves out an exception excluding the period of limitation when the proceedings are being pursued with… Read More ...
Bloomberg Television Production Services India Private Limited VERSUS Zee Entertainment Enterprises Limited (Supreme Court)
Supreme Court: Tests to be satisfied before grant of interim injunctions/ stay orders (i) The three-fold test of establishing (i) a prima facie case, (ii) balance of convenience and (iii) irreparable loss or harm, for the grant of interim relief, is well-established in the jurisprudence of this Court. This test is equally applicable to the grant of… Read More ...
Dnyaneshwar Maharaj Sansthan Alandi Dewachi vs. ITO (Bombay High Court)
Bombay High Court: Even 143(1) assessment cannot be reopened for conducting fishing enquiry or merely on suspicion. Where trust is a religious institution which receives offerings from devotees to their deity of faith in cash or otherwise, mere fact that there are cash deposits cannot mean that there is any reason to believe that income has escaped assessment,… Read More ...
Chokshi Arvind Jewellers vs. Union of India (Bombay High Court)
Bombay High Court: (1) The power exercised by the proper officer under Section 110(5) of the Customs Act, 1962 in directing provisional attachment of the bank account of a person is quite drastic or coercive in nature resulting in attracting civil consequences. If a bank account of a person is attached, it would certainly cause severe prejudice to… Read More ...