Author: ksalegal

Author Archive


Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board v. CIT (2018) 401 ITR 74 / 162 DTR 73/ 300 CTR 449/ 253 Taxman 178 (Karn) (HC)

S.142(2A): Inquiry before assessment– Special audit– Order passed without application of mind and objections of the assesse was held to be bad in law .

Bajaj Auto Finance Ltd. v. CIT (2018) 404 ITR 564 / 166 DTR 379 (Bom)(HC) , www.itatonline.org

S. 143(1)(a) : Assessment – Intimation –Provision for doubtful over due instalments – Adjustment was held to be not valid – Interpretations given by High Courts and Tribunals cannot be ignored by the Assessing Officers [ S. 36(1)(vii), 36(2) ]

Nokia India Pvt Ltd v. Addl.CIT ( 2018) 402 ITR 517 / 301 CTR 665 / 164 DTR 121/ 255 Taxman 266 ( Delhi) (HC).Editorial: SLP filed by the assessee, Nokia India Pvt Ltd v. Addl. CIT (2018)169 DTR 1(SC) ( 2018) Direction of special audit stayed .

S.142(2A): Inquiry before assessment– Special audit–Time limit for assessment-Opportunity of oral and written submission against the order for special audit was considered , hence writ is not maintainable – Issuance and despatch of order u/s 142(2A) with in period of limitation and service on assesse beyond limitation period , order does not abate. [ S. 143(3), 153 , Expl. 1(iii) ]

PCIT v. National Informatics Centre Services Inc. (2018) 400 ITR 387/ 162 DTR 97/ 300 CTR 495 (Delhi) (HC)

S. 139D : Return in electronic form – Form V furnished through post within stipulated extended period — Originally filed return was held to be valid [ S. 139C, 295B ]

K. S. Puttaswamy v. UOI (2018) 252 Taxman 357 (SC)

S. 139AA : Permanent account number – Date for linking of Aadhaar with all schemes of ministries/Departments of Union Government linking of bank accounts for existing bank accounts and for completion of Aadhaar based E-KYC process in respect of mobile phone subscribers is to be extended until 31-3-2018

Scorpion Industrial Polymers (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (2018) 252 Taxman 413/ 163 DTR 333 / 301 CTR 481 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 139 : Return of income – Set off of carry forward loss – Audit report –Matter was remanded for fresh disposal .

Amit Basu v. Dy. CIT (2018) 252 Taxman 314/167 DTR 110 / (2019) 307 CTR 303 (Raj.)(HC)

S. 139 : Return of income – When the assessee took advantage of provisions of S.139(5),he could not say that it was non-est [ S.10B, 139(5)]

S. Savithri (Mrs.) v. ITO ( 2018) 400 ITR 513/ 253 Taxman 186 / 164 DTR 102 / 301 CTR 734 (Karn) (HC)

S. 133 : Power to call for information – Legal representatives cannot refuse to furnish details of bank accounts of deceased. [ S.133(6).]

Prathibha Jewellery House v. CIT (A) (2018)404 ITR 91/ 252 Taxman 174/ 301 CTR 347 / 162 DTR 174(Karn.)(HC)

S. 132 : Search and seizure – Validity of the Search- Pending before Supreme Court – All Authorities of department as also Courts should await decision of Supreme Court on the issue of validity of Search and could not direct Appellate Authorities of department to go into question of validity of search [S. 153A.]

Sai Ramakrishna Karuturi v. UOI(2018) 402 ITR 7 / 252 Taxman 194/163 DTR 420 (Karn.)(HC)

S. 131: Power – Discovery – Production of evidence –As the assessee was carrying on business in same premises proceedings initiated u/s 131 of the Act was held to be valid [ The Diplomatic Relations (Vienna Convention) Act, 1972 ]