Author: ksalegal

Author Archive


Duraipandi and S. Thalavaipandian (AOP) v. ACIT (2019) 415 ITR 437/ 178 DTR 233/ 310 CTR 98 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty–Concealment-Explanation 5-Disclosed undisclosed income in the course of the statements under section 132(4), specifying the manner of earning it from real estate business and paid tax with interest for which no time frame is fixed in Explanation 5(2)-Levy of penalty is held to be not justified. [S. 132(4), 158BC]

Hamirpur District Co-Operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT (2019) 415 ITR 184/ 182 DTR 160/ 311 CTR 50/103 taxmann.com 350 (All) (HC) Editorial : SLP of assessee is dismissed ; Hamirpur District Co-Operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT ( 2020) 269 Taxman 201 (SC)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty–Concealment–Advance tax shown as expenses–Appropriation of profits shown as loss-Levy of penalty is held to be justified for concealment of income and furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income.

PCIT v. Ravani Developers. (2019) 415 ITR 91 (Guj.)(HC)

S. 271AAA : Penalty-Search initiated on or after 1st June, 2007–Immunity from penalty—Explaining manner in which undisclosed income derived-Paying tax and interest–Deletion of penalty is held to be valid.[S. 132(4)]

EBR Enterprises v. UOI (2019) 415 ITR 139/ 180 DTR 73 / 266 Taxman 15/ 311 CTR 698(Bom.) (HC)

S. 264 : Commissioner-Revision of other orders-Hosing projects- Failure to claim deduction in return-Commissioner cannot grant the deduction in revisional jurisdiction by virtue of S.80A(5) of the Act. [S. 80A(5), 80IB(10)]

Nagal Garment Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (2019) 415 ITR 134 (MP) (HC) Editorial : SLP is granted to the assessee Nagal Garment Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (2019) 414 ITR 11 (St)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Lack of application of mind to return and documents filed by assessee and failure to conduct enquiry-Revision is held to be valid.

Arun Trehan v. CIT (2019) 415 ITR 175 (P&H)(HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Initial assessment year-Claim was accepted without proper enquiry–Reassessment is valid. [S. 80IC, 143(3)]

CIT v. S&S Power Switchgear Ltd. (2019) 415 ITR 376 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 260A : Appeal-High Court–Merger of order–Composite order being questioned before the court was rejected earlier-Appeal is held to be not maintainable. [S. 32(2), 72, 254(2)]

Bellad Bagewadi Krishi Seva Sahakari Bank Ltd. v. ITO (2019) 415 ITR 454 (Karn.)(HC)

S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal–Duties-Tribunal denying Deduction without giving an opportunity to be heard-Matter remanded. [S. 80P(2), 80P(4)]

Tata Communications Limited v. DCIT (2019) 415 ITR 344/ 180 DTR 121/ 265 Taxman 461/ 311 CTR 690 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 244A : Refunds–Interest on refunds-Appellate Tribunal directing Assessing Officer to calculate interest based on Supreme Court and High Court Decisions-Assessing Officer cannot traverse beyond scope of such order-Existence of alternative remedy is not bar to exercise of writ jurisdiction when the order is passed is bad in law and when authority exceeds his jurisdiction. [Art. 226]

Agarwal Enterprises v. DCIT (2019) 415 ITR 225 / 307 CTR 322 / 175 DTR 57 (Bom.)( HC)

S. 244A : Refunds–Interest on refunds-Amount seized–Shown as advance tax-Return accepted-Entitled to interest. [S. 132B(4)]