Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Rungta Irrigation Ltd. v. ACIT (2020) 181 ITD 95 / 206 TTJ 449/ 193 DTR 121 (Kol) (Trib.)

S. 143(2) : Assessment – Notice – Notice issued after date of transfer was regarded as invalid notice – Assessment framed pursuant to illegal notice is held to be void ab initio .[ S.124, 127, 143(3) ]

Rungta Irrigation Ltd. v. ACIT (2020) 181 ITD 95 / 206 TTJ 449/ 193 DTR 121 (Kol) (Trib.)

S. 143(2) : Assessment – Notice – Notice issued after date of transfer was regarded as invalid notice – Assessment framed pursuant to illegal notice is held to be void ab initio .[ S.124, 127, 143(3) ]

Peerless Hospitex Hospital & Research Centre Ltd. v. DCIT (2020) 181 ITD 446/ 196 DTR 57/ 207 TTJ 300 (Kol) (Trib.)

S. 115JB : Book profit – Carrying forward of unabsorbed business losses for more than 8 years does not apply while computing adjusted book profits [ S.72 ]

Badri Narain Kanta Devi Katta Charitable Trust. v. CIT (2020) 181 ITD 178 (Jaipur) (Trib.)

S. 80G : Donation – Approval – Registration Immediate non -start of activity cannot be reason for denial of approval u/s 80G(5 ) of the Act -Matter remanded . [ S. 2(15) , 12AA, 80G(5)

Govind Kumar Khemka. v. ACIT (2020) 181 ITD 586/ 193 DTR 341 / 207 TTJ 393 (Delhi) (Trib.)

S. 69B : Amounts of investments not fully disclosed in books of account –Family settlement – Contribution to family settlement by taking loan from bank – Addition is held to be not valid .

Pabitra Mohan Samal v. ITO (2020) 181 ITD 391 (Cuttack) (Trib.)

S. 69 :Unexplained investments – Immoveable property – Failure to produce evidence in respect of booking of flat – Addition is held to be justified . [ S.251 ]

Dr. Atul T Patel. v. DCIT (2019) 108 taxmann.com 227 /(2020) 181 ITD 812/ 193 DTR 221/ 207 TTJ 252 (Ahd) (Trib.)

S. 69 :Unexplained investments – Private discretionary trust – Beneficiary – Settlor – Beneficiary can be taxed only income component – Settlor has to explain the source of investments – Matter set aside – Penalty appeal also set aside .[ S.271(1) ( c) ]

Tradelink Carrying (P.) Ltd. v. ITO (2020) 181 ITD 408 (Kol) (Trib.)

S.68: Cash credits – Share capital – Creditworthiness of subscribers and genuiness of transactions were proved- Addition is held to be not justified .

Par Excellence Leasing and Financial Services (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2020) 181 ITD 437/ 195 DTR 129/ 207 TTJ 1133 (Delhi) (Trib.)

S. 68 : Cash credits -Share capital – Companies never existed in given addresses- Fictitious and bogus companies- Addition is held to be justified . [ S. 153A , 153C ]

Pabitra Mohan Samal v. ITO (2020) 181 ITD 391 (Cuttack) (Trib.)

S.68: Cash credits – Bank deposits -Produced all relevant documents- Merely because assessee had not filed an application to file such additional evidence before CIT (A) such additional documents could not be rejected. [ S.251 ]