Author: ksalegal

Author Archive


Vodafone Idea Ltd v. Dy.CIT ( 2019) 182 DTR 177/ 311 CTR 210 ( Bom) (HC)

S. 281B : Provisional attachment – Reasoned order- When earlier assessment years Tribunal has suspended the recoveries arising out of demands made on similar issues – Order of provisional attachment is set aside . [ S.245, Art . 226 ]

Sharp Tools v. PCIT (2019) 311 CTR 505 /183 DTR 289/( 2020) 421 ITR 90 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 264 :Commissioner – Revision of other orders – Revised return filed beyond limitation period rectifying the mistake – Rejection of application is held to be not valid – Matter is remitted back to the CIT for considering the claim of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order-No tax shall be collected except by authority of law . [ S. 139(1), 139(5) , 154 ,Art .226, Art .265 ]

PCIT v. ITSC. (2019) 311 CTR 284 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 245D : Settlement Commission – Failure to disclose a full and true disclosure – Order passed by consent – Settlement recorded by the Commission on consent of the parties- Dept cannot challenge the order which is passed by consent . [ S.245D(4) Art. 226 ]

Manjula (Smt) v.ITO ( 2019) 178 DTR 361/ 309 CTR 287 ( Karn) (HC)

S. 220 : Collection and recovery – Assessee deemed in default – Natural justice – Stay -Recovery – When an opportunity of personal audience is requested the law requires due consideration- Rejection of application without affording an opportunity of hearing is set aside- Directed the AO to pass speaking order after giving an opportunity of hearing . [ S.220(3), Art 14. ]

Lalhibhai Kanjibhai Mandalia v PCIT ( 2019) 180 DTR 49 (Guj) (HC)

S. 132 : Search and seizure – Loan transaction is reflected in the books of account and return filed by the assesee- No material basis of which a reasonable person could have formed the opinion and lack of jurisdiction – Search action is held to be invalid [ Art. 226 ]

PCIT v. Wadhawan Designs ( 2019) 184 DTR 299 / (2020) 313 CTR 173 (Delhi ) (HC)

S. 68 : Cash credits –Bogus Purchases – Name of supplier could not be traced – No justification for applying GP rate – Addition as unexplained cash credit is up held [ S.37(1) ,69C 145 ]

National Company v. ACIT ( 2019) 178 DTR 305 (Mad) (HC)

S.45(4) : Capital gains – Distribution of capital asset -Retirement- On retirement the amount received does not represent consideration in lieu of relinquishment of his interest in the partnership asset – Addition cannot be made in the assessment of the firm [ S.45 ]

CIT v. Anand, S. M. (2019) 311 CTR 795 (Karn )(HC)

S. 40(a)(ia): Amounts not deductible – Deduction at source – Second proviso to S. 40(a)(ia) of the Act inserted by Finance Act, 2012 is clarificatory and retrospective in nature – No disallowance can be made where the recipient of the amount has already discharged his tax liability therein .[ S. 40(a) ,139(1) ]

CIT ( E ) v. Shiv Kumar Sumitra Devi Smarak Shikshan Sansthan ( 2019) 182 DTR 7 ( All) (HC)

S. 12A : Registration –Trust or institution- Assessment was not pending before AO but before the Tribunal -Granting of registration for the AY. 2011-12 is held to be not valid. [ S. 11, 12 ]

Xstrata Coal Marketing AG v. Dalmia Bharat (Cement) Ltd. (2019) 311 CTR 597/183 DTR 315 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 9(1)(vii):Income deemed to accrue or arise in India – Fees for technical services – Monies received towards arbitration costs and legal costs – Amount payable as per decree – Not liable to deduct tax at source -DTAA-India – Switzerland [S.190 , Art .22 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 S.48 ]