Author: ksalegal

Author Archive


Tehmul Burjor Sethna. v. ACIT (2019) 418 ITR 596/ (2020) 187 ITR 289/ 313 CTR 614 (Guj.)(HC)

S. 142(2A) : Inquiry before assessment–Special audit–Search proceedings-Individual not required to be maintain account statutorily Providing accommodation entries–Order for special audit is held to be justified-Petition also dismissed on the ground of belatedly approaching the Court. [Art. 226]

ACIT v. Dalmia Power Ltd (2019) 418 ITR 242 (Mad.)(HC) ACIT v Dalmia Cement Power Ltd. (2019) 418 ITR 242 (Mad.) (HC) Editorial : Decision in Dalmia Power Ltd / Dalmia Cement ( Bharat ) Ltd v .ACIT (2019) 418 ITR 221 / 308 CTR 777/ 178 DTR 113/ 265 Taxman 37 (Mad.)(HC) is reversed. Order of High Court is reversed Dalmia Power Ltd v ACIT (SC) CA Nos 949669 of 2019 (Arising out of SLP Nos 19678681 of 2019 dt 18 -12-2019 ) (2019 ) 112 taxmann.com 252/ ( 2020) 269 Taxman 352 / 312 CTR 113/ 420 ITR 339/ 185 DTR 1 (SC) www.itatonline.org .

S. 139 : Return of income–Delay in filing revised return-Amalgamation-Sanction of company Law Tribunal is not binding on Income-Tax Authorities-Application for condonation of delay to me made. [S.119, Companies Act, 2013, S. 230(5), Constitution, Art. 226]

SVS Oil Mills. v. ACIT (2019) 418 ITR 442/ 311 CTR 1002 / ( 2020) 186 DTR 122(Mad.)(HC)

S. 133A : Power of survey–Undisclosed income-Admission of excess stock and excess cash–Addition is held to be valid–Mentioning of wrong section in the assessment order does not make addition as unsustainable. [S. 69B, 69C, 131]

Kamleshbhai Rajnikant Shah. v. DIT (2019) 267 taxman 159/( 2020) 420 ITR 274 / 186 DTR 221/ 313 CTR 418(Guj.)(HC)

S. 132A : Powers-Requisition of books of account–Search and seizure–Cash found from the employees of Courier services-Explanation that the cash was withdrawn from several bank accounts–Failure to produce relevant documents–Issue of warrant of authorisation is held to be valid. [S. 131, 132, Art. 226]

Bannalal Jat Constructions Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT (2019) 418 ITR 291 (Raj.)(HC)

S. 132(4) : Search and seizure-Statement on oath–Evidentiary value–Retraction-Statement cannot be discarded merely on ground that it was retracted. [S. 131, 132, 133A]

MRL Posnet P. Ltd. v. PCIT (2019) 418 ITR 349/(2020) 268 Taxman 343/ 189 DTR 361/ 314 CTR 756 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 127 : Power to transfer cases–Transfer for purposes of co-ordinated investigation-Mode of investigation need not be disclosed-Notice to transfer implies that both the Commissioners are in agreement–Manner of agreement need not be recorded-Transfer is held to be valid–Writ is held to be not maintainable. [S. 127(2)(A), Art. 226]

CIT v. Ashok Leyland Ltd. (2019) 266 Taxman 406/(2020) 190 DTR 158 (Mad.) (HC)

S. 115JA : Book profit–Deduction u/s. 80HHC is to be allowed on the basis of book profits and not on the basis of eligible profits under S. 80HHC. [S. 80HHC]

PCIT v. Shreenath Buildcon ( 2019) 110 taxmann.com 389 (Guj.) (HC) Editorial : SLP of revenue is dismissed ; PCIT v. Shreenath Buildcon. (2019) 267 taxman 115 (SC)

S. 80IB(10) : Housing projects-One of the unit constructed exceeded the upper limit-Deduction cannot be denied to entire housing projects – Exemption is not allowable only in respect of the unit exceeded the prescribed limits.

CIT v. Carpet India. (2019) 267 Taxman 93 / ( 2020) 424 ITR 316 (SC) Editorial : Order in CIT v Carpet India (2008) 174 Taxman 417 (P & H) (HC) is set aside.

S. 80HHC : Export business–Supporting manufacturer-Supporting manufacturer is at par with actual direct exporter of goods when it comes to deductions that are available-Remanded the matter back to Tribunal for fresh adjudication. [S. 28(iiid)]

PCIT v.Shah Virchand Govanji Jewellers Pvt. Ltd (2019] 418 ITR 472 (Guj.)(HC)

S. 69C : Unexplained expenditure-Income from undisclosed sources-Bogus purchases–Bhanvarlal Jain group-Hawala concern-Addition cannot be made of entire purchases based on the report of Investigation wing–When sales are accepted purchases cannot be rejected-Estimate of profit of 3% of bogus purchases–Held to be justified–Appeal of revenue is dismissed-No question of law. [S. 260A]