Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category

Sundeep Kathuria v. Dy. DIT (2023) 333 CTR 202 / 148 212 (Delhi)(HC)

Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets ) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015
S. 43 : Penalty – Show cause notice – Since matter was at stage of show-cause notice, directed the statutory authority to adjudicate impugned show-cause notice having regard to response submitted by assessee and also specifically deal with issue relating to jurisdiction. [S. 131 (IA), Art . 226 ]

Fusion Engineering Products (P.) Ltd. v. UOI (2024) 296 Taxman 202 (Jharkhand)(HC)

S. 276B : Offences and prosecutions-Failure to pay to the credit tax deducted at source-Pendency of proceedings before BIFR-Reasonable cause-TDS deposited before issue of notice-Criminal proceedings are quashed.[S.278AA]

PCIT v. Modi Rubber Ltd. (2024)462 ITR 319 /296 Taxman 381 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Furnishing Of Inaccurate Particulars-Notice not specifying the charge-Failure to specify the charge-Order of Tribunal deleting the penalty is affirmed.[S. 260A, 274, 275(1)(a)]

PCIT v. Gujarat Lease Financing Ltd. (2024) 296 Taxman 73 (SC) Editorial : Refer, PCIT v. Gujarat Lease Financing Ltd(2023) 155 635 (Guj)(HC)

S. 268A : Appeal-Instructions-Circulars-Monetary limits-Bad debt-Lease and finance-SLP filed by revenue against said impugned order was to be dismissed as, in terms of CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 dated 8-8-2019, tax amount on which notice had been issued, was less than Rs. 2 crores.[S. 36(1)(vii)]

United Spirits Ltd. v. ACIT (2024) 296 Taxman 141 (Karn)(HC)

S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal-Powers-De novo enquiry-Bad debt-Where Appellate Authority remands case for a determination on a selected issue or aspect of assessment, parties are fully aware of parameters within which fresh enquiry is circumscribed and limited-Rigours of limitation are totally removed-Tribunal had directed Assessing Officer to consider question of disallowance for bad debts/advances being written off-Tribunal’s order did not set aside or cancel subject assessment orders requiring a fresh assessment. [S. S. 36(1)(vii), 153(5), 153(6), Art. 226]

CIT (IT) v. ZTE Corporation (2024) 296 Taxman 571 (SC) Editorial : Refer, CIT (IT) v. ZTE Corporation (2021) 282 Taxman 304 (SC)

S. 234B : Interest-Advance tax-Non-Resident-Entire tax was deductible at source-Not permissible to charge interest-Review petition is dismissed.. [S. 9(1)(1)]

Treadsdirect Ltd. v. ACIT (2024) 296 Taxman 28 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 220 : Collection and recovery-Assessee deemed in default-Stay-Pendency of appeal before CIT(A)-Granted stay till disposal of appeal subject to payment of 10 per cent of demand-Order os single judge is set aside..[S. 250, Art. 226]

Allahabad Development Authority v. CIT (E) (2024) 296 Taxman 159 (SC)

S. 220 : Collection and recovery-Assessee deemed in default-Stay-SLP dismissed as not pressed.[Art. 136]

Adhunik Power & Natural Resources Ltd. v. Central Coalfields Ltd. (2024) 296 Taxman 53 (Jharkhand)(HC)

S. 206C : Collection at source-Refund-Purchase of coal used in generation of power-Directed to refund the amount collected. [S. 206C(IA), 237,244A Art. 226]

ITO, TDS v. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd (2024) 296 Taxman 428 (Pat)(HC)

S. 201 : Deduction at source-Failure to deduct or pay-Limitation-Deemed reasonable period of limitation is four years when no period of limitation is prescribed by statute. [S. 201(1), 201(IA)]