Category: Allied Laws

Archive for the ‘Allied Laws’ Category


ADDE v. Kamal Ahsan & Anr www.itatonline .org (SC)

Harassment by Department – Unnecessary SLP – Respondent suffering from Cancer – Cost of Rs 1,00,000 was imposed on the Officer to be recovered from his salary .

Lechhmina v. Gulab Singh (2022) 287 Taxman 106 /113 CCH 263 (SC)

Prohibition of Benami Property Transaction Act, 1988
S. 49 : Appeal – High Court – Memorandum of appeal – Substantial question of law – No substantial question of law had been raised even before Supreme Court, Special Leave Petition against High Court’s judgment was to be dismissed [ ITACT, S. 260A, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 , S.100 ]

Govind v. Pandurang (2022) 287 Taxman 188/( 2021)) 112 CCH 535 (SC)

Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 .
S. 49 : Appeal – High Court – Second appeal – Substantial question of law – Order passed without framing substantial question of law- Order of High Court quashed and set aside . [ ITACT, S. 260A, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 , S.100 ]

Ashok Kumar Subba v. Bomal Kumar Jain (2022) 287 Taxman 240 / 113 CCH 331 (Sikkim)(HC)

Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988

S. 2(9): Benami transactions – Transactions or arrangements – Failure to produce documents to prove income – Property purchased in the name of wife – Sale agreement is valid .[ S. 2(9)(A)(b)(iii) ]

V. Vasanthakumar v. UOI (2022) 444 ITR 677 (Mad)(HC

Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988.

S. 32 :Qualification for appointment of chairperson and Members of Appellate Tribunal- Constitution Of Appellate Tribunal – Independence of Judiciary — Qualification of Judicial Member — Requirement that he could be a Member of Indian Legal Service or one had held post of additional Secretary or equivalent post in that service — Provision not valid. [ Art , 226 ]

Nexus Feeds Ltd v. ACIT (2022) 444 ITR 261 (Telangana) (HC)

Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016

S.2(a): Benami Property Transactions — Amendment of Act in 2016 Provisions are substantive — Not applicable with retrospective effect – Interpretation of taxing statutes —Rule against retrospectivity . [ S. 2(9)(A) (2(9)(C), Art , 20, 226 ]

B. D. Tea Estates Pvt. Ltd. v State of West Bengal (2022) 444 ITR 504 (Cal)(HC))

Bengal Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1944

S. 34:Method of computation -Agricultural Income -tax -Appeal dismissed – Alternative remedy – Writ is not maintainable [ West Bengal Taxation Tribunal Act, 1987, Art , 226 ]

Cognizance For Extension of Limitation, In Re (2022)441 ITR 722 (SC)

Art : 141 : Limitation —Covid -19 – Extension of periods — Initial order passed by Supreme Court restored — Period from 15-3-2020 till 28-2-2022 excluded for purposes of limitation prescribed under any General or special laws in respect of all judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings — Further clarification given [ Art . 142, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 , S. 23(4),29A, Commercial Courts Act, 2015 S. 12A, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 , S. 38 , any other laws , Courts or Tribunal ]

PCIT . v. Pankaj Singh Brijwal (2022) 441 ITR 713 (Uttarakhand) (HC) PCIT v. Narendra Singh Bisht (2022) 441 ITR 713 (Uttarakhand) (HC) PCIT v. Amar Ram (2022) 441 ITR 713 (Uttarakhand) (HC)

Constitution of India .

Art. 14 : Discrimination- Salary — Income-Tax department – State as an employer -Equal pay for equal work – Peons and watchmen — Difference in wages between those engaged prior to 2013 and those engaged later — Not justified. [ Art, 16, 39 ]

K.Nagarajan v. Adjudication Authority (2022) 284 Taxman 237 (Mad.)(HC)

Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988

S. 24 : Notice and attachment of property- Benami transaction – Gold and cash belong to spouse – Beneficial owner – Provisional attachment is held to be permissible- Petitioner has to respond to notices with supporting evidences . [ S. 24(4)(a)(i) ]