Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Green Valley Infracity P. Ltd. v .ITO (2020) 80 ITR 388 / 193 DTR 201/ 207 TTJ 339(SM) ( Delhi) (Trib)

S. 251 : Appeal – Commissioner (Appeals) – Powers – Remand by Tribunal -Inspector of Income-Tax not competent to issue enhancement notice —Order enhancing income not sustainable [ S. 69C, 251(2) ]

General Motors Overseas Corporation v. ACIT (IT) (2020) 80 ITR 478/ 207 TTJ 404 (Mum) (Trib)

S. 234B : Interest – Advance tax – Failure by payer to deduct tax at source — Interest cannot be imposed.

HCL Comet Ltd v DCIT ( 2020) BCAJ- October – P. 38 ( Delhi) (Trib)

S. 199 : Deduction at source – Credit for tax deducted -Allowed in the year of deduction – Related revenue was booked in subsequent years .[ S.145, 199(3) ]

Sanjay Singhal v. Dy.CIT (2020) 80 ITR 117 (Chd) (Trib) Aarti Singhal (Smt.) v. Dy. CIT (2020) 80 ITR 117 (Chd) (Trib)

S. 153A : Assessment – Search- No incriminating material found during search- Statement of third parties cannot be considered as incriminating material- Opportunity to cross- examination not provided [ S.132(1), 132(4) ]

Dy. CIT v. Taureg Properties and Security Services Ltd (2020)80 ITR 386 ( Delhi) (Trib)

S.148: Reassessment — Notice — Assessing Officer not signing notice or mentioning assessment year — Notice is illegal — Reassessment proceedings not valid .[ S.147]

K. Srikanth v .ACIT (2020) 80 ITR 272 / 195 DTR 17 /206 TTJ 273 ( Chennai ) (Trib)

S. 147 : Reassessment –With in four years-No scrutiny assessment — Non-compete Fee – Claiming a huge exemption of income by making incomplete, untrue and wrong claim — Primary facts not completely, correctly and truly disclosed in return — Reassessment is held to be valid [ S.143(1) 148 ]

Ajay Baldevbhai Patel v. ITO (2020) 80 ITR 367 ( Ahd) (Trib)

S. 144 : Best judgment assessment – No new facts – Addition is held to be justified . [ S.69B ]

Dy. CIT v .Yahoo Software Development P. Ltd. (2020) 80 ITR 528 ( Bang) (Trib)

S.115JB: Book profits —Additional revenue in its books — Assessing Officer cannot tinker with book profit.

Bureau Veritas Consumer Products Services (India) P. Ltd. v ACIT ( 2020) 81 ITR 73 (SN) ( (Delhi) (Trib

S.92C: Transfer Pricing—Comparables- A company is engaged in BPO services cannot be rejected as a comparable merely by stating that it is in the health care segment and is functionally dissimilar -Matter remanded .

Vitech Systems Asia Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO (2020) 81 ITR 58 (SN) (Hyd) (Trib)

S.92C: Transfer pricing -Arm’s length price — Exchange rate fluctuations —Taken part of operating margin [ S.92CA ]