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
S. K. Srivastava (Retd) Vs CBDT (Delhi High Court)
Delhi high court: S. K.Srivastava(Retd) Vs CBDT (Delhi High Court) Date-1st June,2022 Sub- Whether NFAC is not being an income-tax authority is not authorised to pass assessment order and other issues related to reassessment proceedings challenged by a Retd Officer of Income-tax department. In an interesting case, a Retd Officer of Income-tax department was pitted against CBDT when… Read More ...
Dharmendra Kumar Singh vs. UOI (Allahabad High Court)
Allahabad High Court: Srhi Tarun Bajaj, Revenue Secretary to the Government of India, New Delhi dated 19.5.2022 had filed an Affidavit in Harish chandra bhati vs. PCIT if order passed is high-pitched, or there is non-application of mind or gross negligence action shall be taken against such officers. this order passed by AO is patently erroneous and grossly… Read More ...
Harish Chandra Bhati vs. PCIT (Allahabad High Court)
Allahabad High Court: A personal affidavit of Shri Tarun Bajaj, Revenue Secretary to the Government of India, has taken on record. The Government shall take all actions against the erring officers where it is established that assessment framed is High-pitched Assessment, there is non-observance of principles of natural justice, non-application of mind or gross negligence of Assessing Officer/Assessment… Read More ...
Rajendra Kumar Vs ACIT Jaipur (Rajasthan High Court)
Rajasthan High Court: Rajendra Kumar Vs ACIT Jaipur(Rajasthan High Court) Date-25th May 2022 Sub-Whether refunds in excess of 20% of demand pending appeal can be withheld/adjusted ? High handedness of department -Rs 50000/- cost imposed. The Division bench of Rajasthan High Court in this case was dealing with a matter where refund for AY 2018-19 was determined and… Read More ...
Rajendra Kumar Vs ACIT Jaipur (Rajasthan High Court)
Rajasthan High Court: Rajendra Kumar Vs ACIT Jaipur (Rajasthan High Court) Date-25th May 2022 Sub-Whether refunds in excess of 20% of demand pending appeal can be withheld/adjusted? High handedness of department -Rs 50000/- cost imposed. The Division bench of Rajasthan High Court in this case was dealing with a matter where refund for AY 2018-19 was determined and… Read More ...
Ketan Ribbons P Ltd V National Faceless assessment Centre WP (Delhi High Court)
Delhi High Court: DHC order dated: 18-05-2022 Hon’ble Delhi High Court quashed Assessment Order, Notice of demand and Penalty notice passed on 23-05-2021 during COVID-19 where show cause notice and draft assessment order were issued during lockdown and the assessee could not file any reply. The court further was of the view that filing of earlier replies was… Read More ...
Stemade Biotech P.Ltd v. Dy .CIT (Mum) (Trib)
Mumbai ITAT: S.37(1): Business expenditure – Referral commission paid to doctors – Violation of the professional conduct- Not allowable as deduction. [Indian Medical Council (Professional Conduct Etiquette and Ethics) Regulations 2002, R. 6.8. 1(d)] The assessee is a company engaged in the business of ‘extraction, collection, preservation and banking of stem cells ‘mainly from dental pulp. The… Read More ...
jay Chemical Industries limited vs. DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad)
Ahmedabad ITAT: The AO cannot her self make TP addition case is to be referred to TPO in view of madnatory direction of CBDT Read More ...
Harsh Kaushal Corporation vs. ITO (Bombay High Court)
Bombay High Court: Section 147 – Reopening beyond four years – Reopening done to tax deemed rental income relying on Delhi High Court decision in CIT vs. Ansal Housing Finance and Leasing Company Ltd (2013) 354 ITR 180 – Held reopening is bad in law as all primary facts disclosed during original assessment proceedings-Recorded reasons do not state… Read More ...
Divya Capital One (P) Ltd. v. ACIT (Delhi High Court)
Delhi High Court : S. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Order passed without considering the replies of the assessee-Assessed income was Rs. 10,07,05,88,04,543) Rupees One lakh seven hundred and five crores eighty lakhs four thousand five hundred and forty -three only)-Information to suggest-arbitrary, cryptic and without application of mind-not considering the response of the Assessee-Mechanical… Read More ...