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
Kamal Chand Sisodiya vs. ITO (ITAT Indore)
ITAT Indore: Unexplained Cash Deposits – Application of Peak Credit Theory – Acceptance of Past Withdrawals as Source for Subsequent Deposits – Past Savings of a government employee cannot be disbelieved: Read More ...
Ashok Ghelabhai Patel vs Income Tax Officer NFAC, Delhi (ITAT Mumbai)
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “A” BENCH: "Tribunal Remands Case as Assessee Didn't Receive Draft Assessment Order Under Section 144B" Order pronounced in the open court on 09/10/2024 In ITA No. 2959/Mum/2024 and S.A. No. 69/Mum/2024, the assessee claimed that the Assessing Officer (AO) failed to issue a draft assessment order as required under Section 144B of the Income Tax Act and… Read More ...
CIT(E) v. Shree Sai Baba Sansthan Trust – Shirdi (Bom)(HC)
Bombay High Court: S. 115BBC : Anonymous donations – Determination of tax in certain cases-Charitable Trust – Anonymous donations received in the Hundi cannot be taxed under Section 115BBC(1) of the Act – Order of Tribunal is affirmed – No substantial question of law. [S. 10(23C)(v), 11, 12, 12A , 80G (5), 115BBC(2)(b), 260A] The Assessing Officer held… Read More ...
M/s Vijay Jewellers Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai)
ITAT, Mumbai: The assessment was completed with an addition @ 5% or 8% on the alleged bogus purchases and accordingly tax was levied. The assessee withdrew the appeal filed before the ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the penalty u/s 271(1)(C) of the Act was levied on the basis of estimated addition of alleged bogus purchases. Therefore, admittedly the ld.… Read More ...
SKF India Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (ITAT Mumbai) (Special Bench)
Mumbai Tribunal : S. 50 : Capital gains-depreciable assets-Block of assets-Sale of depreciable asset-Long-term capital asset-Short term capital gains- Tax is leviable at 20% as long term under seecti0n 112 of the Act and not at 30% which is applicable to short term capital gains. [S. 2(11), 2(29AA), 2(29B), 2(42A), 2(42B), 2(45), 43(6), 48, 49, 50(1), 50(2), 50A,… Read More ...
North Bihar Power Distribution Company Limited vs PR. CIT-1, PATNA (ITAT Patna)
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PATNA BENCH: i. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. From the perusal of the material placed on record in respect of the issues which formed the basis for passing the order u/s. 263 of the Act, we note that it is not a case of lack of enquiry. We observe… Read More ...
Bahar Infocons Pvt. Ltd. v. PCIT (Bom.)(HC) (UR)
Bombay High Court: S. 264 : Commissioner-Revision of other orders-Income wrongly offered to tax and paid taxes-Assessment completed under section 143(1)-Time for filing revised return under section 139(5) has expired-Double addition- Order of Commissioner dismissing the revision application is set aside-Commissioner is directed to allow the claim of the assessee by passing an appropriate order. [S. 43B, 139(5),… Read More ...
SUNIL CHABLANI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) (ITAT JAIPUR)
ITAT, JAIPUR 'B' BENCH: Case decided in favour of : In favour of : Assessee Reassessment—Validity—Notice under s. 148 issued by non-jurisdictional AO—AO has not controverted that the residential status of the assessee is NRI as on the date of issue of notice under s. 148—Further, the order-sheet entry dt. 16th March, 2023 shows that Faceless Assessment Unit requested… Read More ...
UOI vs. Rajiv Bansal (Supreme Court)
Supreme Court: SC ruled in Revenue’s favour in TOLA batch of re-assessment cases; TOLA will extend time limit in reassessment cases, specifies tests to be applied for relevant assessment years in old & new regime; Directions in Ashish Agarwal judgment will extend to all 90,000 show cause notices; Allahabad HC judgment in Rajeev Bansal, Bombay HC judgment,… Read More ...
Ramniklal and Sons Vs. Income Tax Officer – 19(3)(1) (ITAT Mumbai)
ITAT, MUMBAI: We have gone through the documentary evidences placed before us in the paper book. We also take note of the judicial precedent of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Bombay in the case of PCIT vs Mohammed Haji Adam and Co. [2019] 103 taxmann.com 459 (Bom) which has a relevance in the present set of… Read More ...