Author: ksalegal

Author Archive


Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. v. DCIT (2025) 211 ITD 608 (Mum) (Trib.)

S. 5 : Scope of total income-Inter-Corporate Deposits (ICDs)-Non-Performing Assets (NPAs) as per Prudential Norms issued by RBI-Possibility of recovery is almost nil-Cannot not be treated to have accrued to assesse. [S.4 43D]

ACIT v. Pavani Structurals (P.) Ltd. (2025) 211 ITD 415 (Hyd) (Trib.)

S. 4 : Charge of income-tax-Joint development agreement-Income offered to tax-Making once again addition is lead to double addition-Order of CIT(A) deleting the addition is affirmed.

ACIT v. Pavani Structurals (P.) Ltd. (2025) 211 ITD 415 (Hyd.)(Trib.)

S. 4 : Charge of income-tax-Reimbursement of expenses incurred by JV firm-Order of CIT(A) deleting the addition is affirmed.

ACIT v. Dhiraj Parbat Gothi ( Mum)( Trib ) www.itatonline.org .

S. 69C : Unexplained expenditure – Bogus purchases – Information from Investigation Wing – Addition restricted to 4% justified – Additional ground of Revenue to disallowance at 100% of alleged bogus purchases is rejected – No justification for 100% disallowance in absence of suppression of sales –Books of account not rejected – PCIT v. Kanak Impex (India ) Ltd [2025] 172 taxmann.com 283/ 474 ITR 175 (Bom)( HC) is referred . [ S.145, 147 , 148 ]

Caishen Enterprise LLP v. ACIT ( Bom)( HC) . www.itatonline.org

S. 148A: Reassessment – Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice – Faceless assessment – Notice is issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer – On writ the Court set aside the notice issued under Section 148 and all other proceedings/orders emanating therefrom- Honourable Court has granted liberty to the Revenue to revive the order simply by moving a Praecipe before this Court- The Court also observed that once the Petition is revived and restored, the same would have to be decided on its own merits considering that several other issues are also raised in challenging the Notice issued under Section 148 [ S. 148 ,Art. 226 ]

Carona Limited v .DCIT (Bom )( HC) www.itatonline .org

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty – Concealment – Disallowance of deduction- Method of accounting – Plausible interpretation of law – No malafide intention – Disclosed all relevant facts and no false statement –Penalty is deleted . [S. 43B , 145 , 260A ]

Bajaj Auto Ltd v Dy. CIT ( Bom)( HC). www.itatonline.org CIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd ( Bom)( HC) www.itatonline.org

S. 4 : Charge of income-tax – Capital or revenue – Sales Tax Incentive – Purpose test – Incentive for setting up industrial unit in backward area – Sales tax incentive under 1979 and 1983 Schemes is capital receipt, not chargeable to tax.[ S. 28(i), 43B, 1979 Scheme . 1983 Scheme]

Kotak Family Foundation v. CIT( E ) (Bom HC) www.itatonline.org

S. 11 : Income from property held for charitable or religious purposes – Delay in e-verification of audit report – Audit report in Form 10B filed in time- E-verification delayed due to COVID- Delay is not intentional – Delay of 101 or 254 days within permissible limit – Rejection of condonation against principles of substantive justice – Procedural lapses should not override substantive justice, especially when there was no mala fide intent or negligence by the petitioner- Rejection order is quashed – Delay condoned . [S. 12A, 12AA, 80G , Form No 9A, form No 10B , Art.226 ]

Darshan Singh Parmar v. UOI( Bom)( HC) www.itatonline.org

Maharashtra Goods and Service Tax , Act, 2017
S. 73; Demands and Recovery – Tax evasion- Reward for providing information related to tax evasions – Reward determined but not paid by the government –Reward scheme should be operated fairly and avoid frivolous objections – Government directed to pay the reward with interest in case of delay.- Circular GR No.STA-2004/CR-103 Taxation -2 dt -5-6 -2007 . [ S. 74 ]

Skytech Rolling Mill Pvt. Ltd. v Joint Commissioner of State Tax Nodal ( Bom)( HC) www.itatonline.org

Maharashtra Goods and Service Tax (MGST Act), 2017

S: 83: Provisional attachment to protect revenue in certain cases – Cash credit accounts – Not a property of the account holder – Cannot be attached provisionally u/s 83- Directed to withdraw the attachment within 24 hours . [S.83(1), Art. 226]