Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020
S. 2(b): Appellate forum- Tribunal remanded the matter – Pendency of appeal before CIT (A) on specified date – Rejection of order is held to be unsustainable [ S.246A, 253, Art, 226 ]
Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020
S. 2(b): Appellate forum- Tribunal remanded the matter – Pendency of appeal before CIT (A) on specified date – Rejection of order is held to be unsustainable [ S.246A, 253, Art, 226 ]
Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020
S. 2(b): Appellate forum- Disputed Tax—Pendency of appeal — Declaration cannot be rejected on ground that assessee had offered an amount for taxation – The rejection of the declaration under the 2020 Act was not valid. [ S. 2 (j) ]
Wealth Tax Act, 1957
S.17 : Wealth escaping assessment – Reassessment — Concealment of assets or furnishing of inaccurate particulars — Penalty —Provisions in pari materia with provisions of Income-Tax Act, 1961 —Law laid down by Supreme Court in Income-tax Matter is applicable to wealth tax proceedings – Natter remanded to pass speaking order . [ S.17(1), 18(1)(c), ITAct , S.147, Art , 226 ]
Wealth-Tax Act, 1957
S. 7 : Value of assets – Assets seized – Possession of revenue Authorities — Value of assets cannot be included in net wealth- The court directed that the Department shall forthwith release 85,617 grams of gold, jewellery, cash and other valuable articles as per the panchanama and hand it over to the petitioners being the legal heirs of the assessee [ S.7(1) , ITAct , S.132 ]
S. 147 : Reassessment – Bogus purchases – Information must be reliable and there must be some evidence to believe that purchases are bogus- Reassessment was quashed . [ S.148 ]
S. 147 : Reassessment –Reasons recorded are different than the reasons supplied – Reassessment was quashed. [ S. 148 ]
.
S. 72 : Set off of loss-long term capital loss-Tax planning with in frame work of law is permissible -Long term capital loss is allowed to be set off against long term capital gains. [S. 45]
S. 4 : Charge of income-tax – Hardship allowance received from the Developer – Capital receipt-Not chargeable to tax. [S. 2(24)(vi)]
S. 69C : unexplained expenditure-Bogus hawala purchases-Third party statement-Opportunity of cross examination was not provided-Payments were through banking channels by way of letter of credit-Order of Tribunal deleting the addition was affirmed-No question of law. [S. 260A]
S. 148 : Reassessment – Notice – Constitutional validity – The delegation authorized being only for the purpose of enlarging limitation under a valid law, such delegation could not be exercised to resurrect the provision of law that stood omitted from the statute book by virtue of its substitution made by the Finance Act, 2021, w.e.f. 01.04.2021.- Interpretation of Taxing Statutes — Legislative Substitution- Interpretation of Taxing Statutes — Legislative Substitution- Cassus omisus cannot be supplied, either by the delegated legislation or by Courts – The Enabling Act only extended the limitation up to 31.03.2021 to do certain things only. Thereafter, it delegated the power to cause such further extensions to do those things beyond the date 31.12.2020, upto 30.06.2021 – delegate to do colourably, that which it cannot directly do after the Parliament enforced Sections 2 to 88 of the Finance Act 2021, w.e.f. 01.04.2021. once the principal legislation enacted the law as has been done in the present case, its delegate was denuded of its powers, in the field occupied by the principal legislature- Reassessment notices issued under section 148 of the Act are quashed . [ S. 147, 148A, 149, 151 , 151A , 153,292 Relaxation of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 , S.3(1) of the Act 38 of 2020, Art , 226 ]