Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


CET Power Solutions India P. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2023)106 ITR 68 (SN)/ 153 taxmann.com 553 (Chennai ) (Trib)

S. 144C: Reference to dispute resolution panel-Transfer pricing-Reference to Transfer Pricing Officer-Arm’s Length price-Avoidance of tax-Remand order-Order passed by Assessing Officer giving effect to order of Dispute Resolution Panel without understanding Tribunal’s order-Matter remanded to Assessing Officer for adjudication afresh. [S. 92CA]

Teleperformance Global Services P. Ltd. v. Add. CIT (2023) 106 ITR 81 (Mum) (Trib)

S. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel-International Transactions-Arm’s Length Price-Limitation-Period of sixty days to be counted from day prior to date on which period of limitation for assessment expires-Order barred by limitation-Order non est-Ceased to be eligible assessee-Draft assessment order, directions of Dispute Resolution Panel and final asessment order void ab initio-Tribunal has the power to admit additional ground on limitation . [ S.92CA(3) 153 , 254(1) ]

Maccaferri Environmental Solutions P. Ltd. v .Asst. CIT (2023)106 ITR 62 (SN)(Mum) (Trib)

S. 143(3) : Assessment-Amalgamation of companies-Income taxed merely on basis of details in Form 26AS of erstwhile company-Assessing Officer is directed to adjudicate afresh after examination of details furnished by assessee and details in Form 26AS-Deduction only on actual payment-Gratuity-Allowability of gratuity restored to Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication.[S. 43B]

Ketan Tokershi Shah v. Dy. CIT (2023)106 ITR 4 (SN)(Mum) (Trib)

S. 143(3) : Assessment-Jurisdiction of Authorities-Instruction of Board that non-corporate assessees in Metro cities declaring income up to Rs. 20 Lakhs to be assessed by Income-Tax Officer-Returned income of assessee Less Than Rs. 20 Lakhs-Assessment Completed By Deputy Commissioner without jurisdiction-Instruction No. 1 of 2011, Dated 31-1-2011.

Nikesh A. Gada (HUF) v. ITO (2023)106 ITR 590 (Mum) (Trib)

S. 143(2): Assessment-Notice-Mandatory-Failure to issue notice-Assessment is null and void. [S. 143(3), 147, 148]

Dy. CIT v. Bilcare Ltd. (2023) 106 ITR 411/ 224 TTJ 655 / 151 taxmann.com 456 (Pune) (Trib)

S. 139 : Return of income-Revised return-Once revised return is filed, Assessing Officer is not entitled to advert to original return of income-Loss-Loss to be allowed-Assessing Officer could not disturb apparent consideration by substituting agreed consideration by fair market value. [S. 2(11)32(i)(ii),43(6), 50, 72(1) 71(2), 74(1) 80, 139(3), 139(5), 143(3)]

Dy. CIT v. T. S. Kumarasamy (2023)106 ITR 18 (SN) (Chennai) (Trib)

S. 132 : Search and Seizure-Statement in the course of search-Retraction-Retraction not to be rejected as afterthought merely because filed after search, retraction is held to be valid-Warrant of authorisation-Not necessary to issue warrant of authorisation in each and every case-Search proceedings continuing for number of days and assessee required to be present throughout-Does not mean that the assessee has kept in illegal detention. [S. 132(4)]

Weatherford Drilling And Production Services (India) P. Ltd. v Asst. CIT (2023)106 ITR 46 (SN) / 154 taxmann.com 248 (Ahd) (Trib)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Avoidance of tax-International transaction-Sale of goods to associated enterprises-Comparative-Matter remanded to the Assessing Officer .

HM Clause India P. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2023)106 ITR 91 (SN.)/ 153 taxmann.com 209 (Hyd.)(Trib.)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Avoidance of tax-International transaction-Interest on delayed receivables-To Be Benchmarked Applying State Bank Of India Short-Term Deposit Interest Rate For Year-No Material To Show Grace Period Allowed By Assessee To Associated Enterprise-Assessing Officer Granting 30 Days-Proper. [S. 92B, 92F(v)]

DY. CIT v. HSBC Asset Management (I) P. Ltd. (2023)106 ITR 676 / 153 taxmann.com 20 (Mum) (Trib)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Avoidance of tax-International transaction-Expenses allocated on cost-to-cost basis-Transfer pricing adjustments deleted-Tax effect less than prescribed limit of Rs. 50 Lakhs-Appeal of Revenue is held to be not maintainable . [ S.92CA , 253(1) ]