Author: ksalegal

Author Archive


Krishna Kumar Singhania. v. DCIT (2018) 168 ITD 271 (Kol) (Trib.)

S. 153A : Assessment – Search- On the basis of seized documents from office premises of group of companies in which assessee was a director, said material could not be used against the assessee [ S. 132, 292C ]

PCIT v. Sunrise Finlease (P.) Ltd. (2018) 252 Taxman 407 / 171 DTR 237/ 305 CTR 421(Guj.)(HC)

S. 153A : Assessment – Search or requisition – When no incriminating material was found in the course of search, addition cannot be made on the basis of evidence collected after the search . No addition can be made on the basis of statement of director much later after the search [ S.131, 132 ]

CIT v. Manoj Hora. (2018) 402 ITR 175 (Delhi) (HC)

S. 153A : Assessment – Search-Merely on the basis of third party statement without any incriminating evidence addition was held to be not justified [ S. 132 (4) ]

CIT v. Vijay Infrastructure Ltd. (2018) 402 ITR 363 (All) (HC)

S. 153A : Assessment – Search-Industrial undertaking – Developer -Deduction can be claimed in return pursuant to notice under S. 153A of the Income -tax Act [S. 80IA (4)(i), 139(4) ]

Anil Jaggi. v. CIT (2018) 168 ITD 612 (Mum) (Trib.)

S. 151 : Reassessment – Sanction for issue of notice – Failure on part of Assessing Officer to take sanction of appropriate authority would go to very root of validity of assumption of jurisdiction by Assessing Officer [ S. 147, 148,292B ]

Mayurbhai Mangaldas Patel. v. ITO (2018) 168 ITD 317 (Ahd) (Trib.)

S. 151 : Reassessment – Sanction for issue of notice -Reassessment proceedings couldn’t be quashed just because AO had obtained prior approval from higher authority [ S. 147, 148 ]

ITO v. Virat Credit & Holdings Pvt. Ltd. (Delhi)(Trib) , www.itatonline.org

S. 151 : Reassessment – Sanction for issue of notice –Mechanical approval was held to be bad in law [ S. 147, 148 ]

CIT v. Gee Kay Finance And Leasing Co. Ltd. (2018) 401 ITR 472 / 163 DTR 425 / 301 CTR 645 (Delhi) (HC)

S. 151: Reassessment – After the expiry of four years – Sanction of the Chief Commissioner was a pre-condition. [ S.147,148, 149 ]

Maruti Clean Coal And Power Ltd. v. ACIT (2018) 400 ITR 397 / 161 DTR 457 / 300 CTR 358 (Chhattisgarh) (HC)

S. 151 : Reassessment – Sanction for issue of notice – After expiry of four years – Notice and proceedings was vitiated for want of specific sanction .[ S. 147, 148 ]

Skylight Hospitality LLP v. ACIT( 2018) 254 Taxman 390/ 166 DTR 421 / 303 CTR 130 (SC) , www.itatonline.org Editorial. Order in Skylight Hospitality LLP v. ACIT ( 2018) 254 Taxman 109/ 166 DTR 409/ 303 CTR 131 ( Delhi) (HC) is affirmed

S. 147 : Reassessment –Clerical mistake- The object and purpose behind S. 292B is to ensure that technical pleas on the ground of mistake, defect or omission should not invalidate the assessment proceedings, when no confusion or prejudice is caused due to non-observance of technical formalities [ S. 148, 292B ]