Author: ksalegal

Author Archive


Harshdip Singh Dhillon v. UOI (2024) 470 ITR 355 (Delhi) (HC)

S. 205 : Deduction at source-Bar against direct demand-Failure to deposit tax deducted at source-Salary-Demand notice is set aside.[S. 15, 192, 194, 199(1), 201(2), 202, 221, 276B, Art. 226]

PCIT v. Jasjit Singh (2024)470 ITR 337 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 205 : Deduction at source-Bar against direct demand–Principle of grossing up-Failure to deposit tax deducted at source-Payee is entitle to credit for tax deducted at source.[S.192(1), 199(3)]

Incredible Unique Buildcon (P.) Ltd. v. ITO (2023)470 ITR 106 / 155 taxmann.com 603 (Delhi) (HC)

S. 205 : Deduction at source-Bar against direct demand-Tax deducted at source-Form No.16A is issued-Credit for tax deduction at source cannot be denied-Review petition of Revenue is dismissed. [S. 199, Form No.16A, Code of Civil Procedure]

Chintan Bindra v. Dy. CIT (2024)470 ITR 346 /158 taxmann.com 27 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 205 : Deduction at source-Refund adjustment-Bar against direct demand-Salary-Deduction of tax at source-Failure of employer to deposit tax deducted at source-Employee cannot be penalised.[S.192, 194, 199, 237, Art.226]

CIT (IT) v. Red Hat India Pvt. Ltd. (2024)470 ITR 173 (Bom) (HC)

S. 201 : Deduction at source-Failure to deduct or pay-Non-resident-Fees for technical services-If the amount is not chargeable to tax in the assessment of recipient the assesseee cannot be held to be assessee is default-Not liable to pay tax and interest-DTAA-India-Singapore.[S. 9(1)(vi), 191, 195, 201(1), 201(IA), Art. 5, 7, 12(4)(b)]

CIT v. Idea Cellular Ltd. (2024) 470 ITR 479 /158 taxmann.com 163 (Telangana) (HC)

S. 201 : Deduction at source-Failure to deduct or pay-Assessee in default-Limitation-Reasonable period-Order of Tribunal holding that order passed by after four years is barred by limitation is not proper, legal or justified-Binding precedent-Matter is remanded to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)for passing fresh orders. [S. 195, 201(1),201(IA), 260A]

Bhagwandas Rupchand Parwani v. ACIT (2024) 470 ITR 590 / 160 taxmann.com 7 (Guj) (HC)

S. 153C : Assessment-Income of any other person-Search-Recording of satisfaction-Copy in verbatim of satisfaction note of Assessing Officer of searched person-No jurisdictional error-Recording of satisfaction is valid. [S. 132, Art.226]

PCIT v. Shardaben Arvindbhai Patel (2024) 470 ITR 332 (Guj) (HC)

S. 153A: Assessment-Search-No incriminating materials were found-Addition cannot be in respect of completed or Unabated assessment.[s. 55, 68 69C 132]

PCIT v. Shardaben Arvindbhai Patel (2024) 470 ITR 332/ 152 taxmann.com 535 (Guj) (HC)

S. 153A : Assessment-Search-Long term capital gains-No incriminating material is found during search-Order of Tribunal deleting the addition is affirmed.[S. 58,68, 69C, 260A]

CIT v. Goldstone Cements Ltd. (2024) 470 ITR 749 /156 taxmann.com 529 (Gauhati) (HC)

S. 153A : Assessment-Search-Cash credits-Incriminating document-Document of shareholding pattern document prepared by way of secretarial compliance report, which was filed along with company’s annual return in Form MGT-7 with ROC-Available in public domain-Would not constitute incriminating document to justify reopening of assessment of unabated/completed-No substantial question of law. [S. 132, 260A]