Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Nisarahmed Abdulsattar Shaikh v. ITO (2023) 107 ITR 233 (Ahd.)(Trib.)

S. 206C : Collection at source-Trading-Alcoholic liquor-Forest produce-Scrap-Limitation-Assessment year 2012-13-Assessing Officer ought to have assessed order under section 206C(6A) on or before 31-3-2016-Order barred by limitation-Penalty-Failure to collect tax at source-Quantum appeal quashed-Penalty cannot be levied. [S. 206C(7),271CA]

Ness Digital Engineering (India) P. Ltd. v.Add. CIT (2023)107 ITR 584 (Mum) (Trib)

S. 154 : Rectification of mistake-Mistake apparent from the record-Corporate social responsibility-Disallowance is not justified-The Assessing Officer is directed to rectify the mistakes under section 154 within three months. [S. 40(a)(ia), 143(1)]

Abhimanu Adventure Resorts P. Ltd. v Dy. CIT (2023)107 ITR 1 / (2024) 227 TTJ 8 (UO) (Chd) (Trib)

S. 154 : Rectification of mistake-Mistake apparent from the record-Agricultural income-Book profit-Refund of claim-Order of Assessing Officer disposing of rectification application recomputing book profits including agricultural Income-Directed to grant the refund. [S.10(1),115JB]

Bhavya Residency P. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT (2023)107 ITR 10 (SN) (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 153C : Assessment-Income of any other person-Search-Satisfaction note-Incriminating material referred in satisfaction note not connected to assessee-Order is held to be invalid and quashed.

Dy. CIT v. Bajrang Lal Bamalwa (2023)107 ITR 130 (Kol) (Trib)

S. 153A : Assessment-Search-No incriminating material found in search-Alleged bogus long-term capital gains-Amalgamation approved by High Court-No evidence to prove transactions were bogus-Addition is deleted-No search on assessee-No assessment order could have been passed. [S. 10(38) 132, 133A]

Kuldeep Kumar v. ITO (2023)107 ITR 241 / 226 TTJ 341 (Jodhpur) (Trib)

S. 147 : Reassessment-Cash credits-Undisclosed income-Source of cash deposits explained-Addition not sustainable-Reassessment invalid.[S. 68, 148]

Khed Economic Infrastructure P. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2023)107 ITR 83 (SN)(Pune) (Trib)

S.147: Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-With in four years-Raised specific query in the original assessment proceedings-No new tangible material-Reassessment is bad in law.[S. 143(3 148]

Asst. CIT (OSD) v. S. S. Gas Lab Asia P. Ltd. (2023)107 ITR 482 (Delhi) (Trib)

S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-No failure to disclose material facts-Reassessment is quashed. [S. 148]

Eaton Power Quality P. Ltd. v. Dy. Dy. CIT (2023)107 ITR 195 (Chennai) (Trib)

S. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel-Limitation-Legal issue-Can be raised at any time-Matter remanded to Assessing Officer to consider additional ground of limitation on Dispute Resolution Panel’s Direction. [S. 92CA, 153, 254(1), ITATR.11]

Asst. CIT v. Montecarlo Construction Ltd. (2023)107 ITR 411 (Ahd) (Trib)

S. 144 : Best judgment assessment-Rejection of books of account-Estimate of gross profit-No purchases from shell companies-Declared greater profit from earlier years-No addition is warranted.