Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Rashid K. Nurani v ITO (2020) 78 ITR 26 (SN) ( Ahd) (Trib)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty – Concealment -Failure to disclose in respect of income with respect to two bank accounts – Mistake of consultant – Omission neither deliberate nor contumacious in conscious disregard to his obligation — Bona fide mistake- Levy of penalty is held to be not justified . [ S. 44AD,139, 143(2) ]

Deem Roll-Tech Ltd. v Dy. CIT (2020) 78 ITR 45 (SN) ( Ahd) (Trib)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty – Concealment – Disallowance of interest -Mere wrong claim not tantamount to furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income or concealment of income.

Suresh Mutha v .ACIT (2020) 78 ITR 75 (SN) ( Chennai) (Trib)

S. 271(1)(b) : Penalty – Failure to comply with notices – Regular assessment details were filed – Not ex prate best judgment – Penalty is held to be not justified [ S .142(1), 274 ]

SL Lumax Ltd. v. PCIT (2020) 78 ITR 1 ( SN) ( Chennai) (Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue – Record – Provision for warranty- Assessing Officer forming proper opinion after making due enquiries and verification-Revision not valid. [ S. 37(1),145 ]

AVV Enterprises P. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2020) 78 ITR 60 (SN) (Delhi) (Trib)

S.234E: Fee-Default in furnishing the statements- Provision Prospective — No demand could be made for Assessment Years for periods prior to 1-6-2015 [ S.200A(1)( c ) ]

Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Ltd. v Dy. CIT (TDS) (2020) 78 ITR 61 ( SN) ( Vishhaka ) (Trib)

S. 201 : Deduction at source – Failure to deduct or pay – Interest-Joint deposit holders —Not furnishing actual tax liability or details — Calculation of tax deduction at source liability in respect of 162 Cases justified [ S.194A, 201(1), 201(IA) Form No .15G 15H ]

ITO v. Orient Craft Fashion Institute Of Technology (P.) Ltd. (2020) 78 ITR 10 (SN) (Delhi) (Trib)

S. 199 : Deduction at source – Credit for tax deducted – Percentage completion method- Offering income as and when accrued – Principle of consistency — Deferred income not liable to tax- Assessing Officer directed to restrict credit of tax deduction at source corresponding to income offered by assessee. [ S.145 ,R. 37BBA(3) ]

Suresh H. Thakkar v. CIT(Appeals) (2020) 78 ITR 73 (SN)(Mum) (Trib)

S.147: Reassessment -Unexplained investment -Date wise statement of withdrawal of cash from bank account and deposit in bank account neither faulted nor doubted — Addition is held to be not justified [ S. 69, 148 ]

Sarwar Mohd. Khan v. ACIT (2020) 78 ITR 39 (SN) (Indore ) (Trib)

S. 147 : Reassessment – No addition was made as regards reasons recorded – Reassessment is held to be not valid [ S.54F,148 ]

K. Gurumurthy v. ITO (2020) 78 ITR 50( SN) ( Chennai) (Trib)

S.147:Reassessment – Appeal To Appellate Tribunal —No specific deficiencies in cash and bank books- Generalised adverse comments- Assessing Officer to go through records and to point out specific defects and escapement of income- Matter remanded for limited verification [ S.148, 254(1) ]