Author: ksalegal

Author Archive


PCIT v Kumagai Sknska HCCITOCHU Group ( 2019) 311 CTR 838 ( Bom) (HC)

S. 244A : Refund – Interest on refunds – Tax deducted at source – Quatitifucation of interest – Interest would be pyable from the respective assessment years – Starting point for computing the interest payble must be to the assessment year in which the tax was deducted at source .[ S. 195(2) , 199 244A(1)(a) ]

PCIT v. Rajkumar Gulab Badgujar ( 2019) 111 taxmann.com 256 / 267 Taxman 489 (Bom) (HC) Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed PCIT v. Rajkumar Gulab Badgujar ( 2019) 267 Taxman 488 (SC)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty – Concealment – Search and seizure- Return filed after search action- Income returned was accepted -In the absence of addition no penalty can be levied . [ S. 132 , 153C, 271C ]

Mohanlal Champalal Jain v. CIT ( 2019) 102 taxmann.com 293 (Bom) (HC) Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed ITO v. Mohanlal Champalal Jain ( 2019) 267 Taxman 391 (SC)

S.147: Reassessment -Failure to file return- Huge loss – National and muticommodity exchange – Objections stating that no income was erned and suffered heavy loss not considered – Reassessment is held to be bad in law .[ S. 139 , 148 Art. 226 ]

University of Delhi v. UOI (SC), www.itatonline.org

Limitation Act , 1963 .
S.5 : Extension of prescribed in certain cases – Condonation of delay- 916 days- A liberal approach is to be taken in the matter of condonation of delay – The consideration for condonation of delay would not depend on the status of the party , namely the Government or the pubic bodies – Condonation of delay is not automatic- No proper explanation was filed for condonation of delay – Condonation of delay was dismissed . [Civil Procedure, 1908, Order XXI of the Code Art. 226 ]

P. Singaravelan v. District Collector (SC),www.itatoline.org

Interpretation of taxing statutes – Constitution of India
Art. 141 : Precedent – SLP dismissal – Non-speaking order -It does not constitute a declaration of law under Article 141 of the Constitution, or attract the doctrine of merger. [ Art, 136 ]

Universal Cable Ltd. v. CIT( 2020) 420 ITR 111/312 CTR 1/ 185 DTR 33/ 270 Taxman 170(SC), www.itatonline.org Editorial: Order in Universal Cable Ltd. v. CIT ( 2009) 26 DTR 98/ (2011) 237 CTR 157 (MP ) (HC ) is set aside .

S. 244A: : Refund – Interest on refunds – Unauthorized retention of money by the Department – The Department is directed to pay interest as prescribed .

Usha Exports v. ACIT ( 2020) 312 CTR 237/ 185 DTR 87 (Bom)(HC), www.itatonline.org

S. 147: Reassessment – After the expiry of four years- Bogus purchases- Accommodation entries- No failure to disclosure material facts- Change of opinion- Reassessment is held to be bad in law .[ S. 69C ,148 ]

RDS Project Ltd v. ACIT ( 2020) 312 CTR 345/185 DTR 180 (Delhi)(HC), www.itatonline.org

S. 147: Reassessment- After the expiry of four years- Bogus share application money – Shell company – Money received from dubious companies -0 Reassessment is held to be valid – Cost of 2 lakh was imposed on assessee for wasting Court’s time [ S. 68, 143(3) , 148 , Art, 226 ]

Dalmia Power Ltd v. ACIT /(2019) 112 taxmann.com 252/ (2020) 269 Taxman 352 / 312 CTR 113/420 ITR 339 /185 DTR 1(SC), www.itatonline.org Editorial: Order in ACIT v Dalmia Power Ltd ( 2019) 418 ITR 242 // 312 CTR 127/ 185 DTR 16 (Mad)(HC) is reversed.

S. 139 : Return of income – Delay in filing revised return- Amalgamation – Approval by NCLT – Revised return filed after due date of filing of return is irrelevant- Not required to seek condonation of delay by CBDT [ S. 119(2) (b) , 139 (5) , 170 ]

Hemant M. Mehta HUF v. ACIT (SMC) (Mum)(Trib), www.itatonline.org

S. 69C : Unexplained expenditure – Bogus purchases – Sales accepted – The AO is directed to restrict the addition to the extent of lower GP declared by the assessee in respect of bogus purchases as compared to G.P. on normal purchases. [S.68 ]