Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Manoj Naraindas Motwani v. ACIT [2025] 174 taxmann.com 798 (Bom) (HC)

S.143(3): Assessment-Alternative remedy-No extraordinary circumstances warranting interference under writ jurisdiction-The writ petition was dismissed. [S. 246A, Art. 226]

Vibgyor Vinimay (P.) Ltd. v. NFAC [2025] 175 taxmann.com 643 (Bom) (HC)

S. 143(3) : Assessment-Undisclosed investments-Opportunity of hearing-One day’s time to respond to show-cause notice-Violation of natural justice-Matter remanded.[S. 69B, 144B, Art. 226]

CIT-LTU v. Shell India Markets (P.) Ltd. [2025] 174 taxmann.com 349 (Bom) (HC) Editorial : SLP of revenue dismissed, CIT-LTU v. Shell India Markets (P.) Ltd (2026] 310 Taxman 1 (SC)

S. 143(3): Assessment-Non-existent entity-Merger-Notice and assessment in the name of transferor company-Invalid-Order of Tribunal affirmed.[S.147.260A, 292B]

Fiat India Automobiles Ltd. v. DDIT [2025] 170 taxmann.com 789 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 143(1): Assessment-Intimation-Writ petition challenging huge demand-Where intimation was appealable under section 246A and no mandatory pre-deposit was required for filing an appeal, the High Court could not interfere in writ jurisdiction merely because a huge demand was raised. [S. 246A, Art. 226]

TPL-HGIEPL Joint Venture v. UOI [2025] 173 taxmann.com 540 (Bom) (HC)

S. 139: Return of income-Invalid return-Non-filing of audit report-Order of CPC-Writ petition-Alternate remedy-Directed to avail the alternate remedy under section 264. [S. 44AB, 139((9),143(1), 264,Art. 226]

Ramesh Bapurao Potdar v. UOI [2025] 173 taxmann.com 227 (Bom) (HC).

S. 132B: Application of seized or requisitioned assets-Seized assets-Police Authorities-Specified Bank Notes-Deposit with RBI-Serial numbers available-Deposit permitted. [S 131, 132; Specified Bank Notes (Cessation of Liabilities) Act, 2017, S. 5(a); Rules, r. 2(a), Art. 226]

Hiralal H. Malu v. DDI (Inv.) [2025] 171 taxmann.com 260 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 132B : Application of seized or requisitioned assets-Release of seized jewellery-Strictures-Department and bank disputing responsibility for missing jewellery-Both authorities directed to investigate and take immediate action.[S. 119, 132, Art. 226]

CIT v. ITAT [2025] 179 taxmann.com 409 (Bom)(HC) Editorial : SLP of revenue dismissed, CIT v. Vijay Goel (2025) 307 Taxman 445 (SC)

S. 132: Search and seizure-Satisfaction note-Revenue did not have the satisfaction note, which formed the basis for issuance and authorisation of the search warrant under section 132(1)-Order was quashed.[S. 132(1), Art. 226]

H. K. Jewels (P.) Ltd. v. ADI (Inv.) [2025] 172 taxmann.com 616 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 132: Search and seizure-Seizure of gold and jewellery claimed to be stock-in-trade-Plea challenging legality of seizure not raised before authorities-Opportunity granted to seek release. [S. 131(1A), 132(1)(iii),Art. 226]

Protractive in and out Advertising (P.) Ltd. v. PCIT [2025] 173 taxmann.com 104 (Bom) (HC).

S. 127: Power to transfer cases-Agreement between officers of equal rank-Condition precedent-Compliance with statutory requirements-Transfer valid. [S.127(2), Art. 226]