Author: ksalegal

Author Archive


Shree Arihant Oil and General Mills v. UOI (Raj)(HC) www.itatonline .org

Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 .

S. 54 : Refund of tax – Input tax credit – Inverted duty structure – Notification No. 09/2022 dated 13-07-2022 applicable prospectively – Refund cannot be denied for period up to 18-07-2022 – Circular restricting refund claims only if filed before 18-07-2022 held arbitrary and violative of Article 14 – Refund application filed within limitation period of two years cannot be rejected. [ S. 5(3), Art . 14 , 226 ]

Sunidhi Securities & Finance Limited v. DCIT, (Mum)(Trib) www.itatonline.org

S. 151 : Reassessment – Sanction for issue of notice – Notice issued under section 148 with sanction of PCIT instead of JCIT – Survey – Invalid sanction – Assessment held to be null and void. [ S. 133A , 143(3),151(2), 147 , 148]

Ramesh Dnyandeo Dhuri v. ITO (SMC)(Mum)(Trib), www.itatonline .org

S. 56 : Income from other sources – Immovable property – Purchase consideration – DVO valuation – Difference of 7% within 10% safe harbour – Amendment by Finance Act, 2020 curative and retrospective – Addition deleted.[ S. 50C , 56(2)(x)(b)(B) ]

Dy.CIT v .Hard castle Restaurant Pvt Ltd ( Mum)( Trib) www.itatonline .org .

S. 153A: Assessment – Search – Abated assessment – No incriminating material was found – Alleged bogus purchases –Addition was deleted . [ S. 69C , 132 ]

Pradeep Jeyavelu v. ITO (SMC) (Chennai) ( Trib) (UR) www.itatonline .org .

S. 64 : Clubbing of income – Minor child – Capital gains – Sale of inherited property – Minor daughter’s share deposited in nationalized bank under Court order – Not includible in assessee’s hands.[S. 45, 54F , Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956, S.8(2) ]

Natesan Ekambaram v. DCIT (Chennai) ( Trib) www.itatonline .org .

S. 54F : Capital gains- Investment in a residential house – Advance received cannot be assessed as capital gains – The AO was directed to recompute the capital gains on actual consideration and also directed to allow the exemption under section. 54F . [S. 45 ]

Shilpa Shetty Kundra v. DCIT (2025) 212 ITD 173 (Mum) (Trib.)

S. 272A : Penalty-Failure to answer questions-Sign statements-Furnish information-Non-compliance of notices issued under section 142(1)-Assessment order was passed under section 143(3)-Penalty deleted. [S. 142(1), 272A(1)(d)]

Himasagar Krishna Muthappagari v. ITO (2025) 212 ITD 292 (Hyd)(Trib.)

S. 263 : Revision-Capital gains-Exemption u/s 54F-Failure of AO to verify claim-Revision upheld. [S. 54F, 147]

Gujarat Metal Cast Industries (P.) Ltd. v. PCIT (2025) 212 ITD 178 (Ahd) (Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Scientific research expenditure-Weighted deduction-Allowed deduction under section 35(2AB) at 200 per cent-Allowable 150 per cent-Revision order is affirmed. [S. 35(2AB, Rule 6]

Suzuki Motor Gujarat (P.) Ltd. v. PCIT (2025) 212 ITD 49 (Ahd) (Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Additional depreciation-At rate of 10 per cent on ‘plant and machinery’ put to use for a period of less than 180 days during preceding year-No error-Revision order is set aside. [S. 32(1)(ii), 43(6)]