Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


CIT v Citi Bank N. A. (No. 2) (2024)469 ITR 398 (SC) Editorial : Citi Bank N.A. v. CIT (2003) 262 ITR 47 (Bom)(HC) CIT v. Citi Bank N. A. (No. 4) (2024)469 ITR 410 (SC) Editorial : CIT v. Citi Bank N. A (ITR No. 349 of 1995 dt. 5-3 2003 (Bom)(HC)

S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Precedent-Reference decided in favour of assessee-Appeal of Revenue is dismissed-Not establishing public interest on divergence of opinion among High Courts or Just Cause-Appeal is dismissed-Business income-Interest on securities-Business income-Business expenditure-Salaries and perquisites-Disallowance is to be restricted to expenditure apportioned under profits and gains of business or profession and not under head interest on securities.[S. 18, 20(1(i), 28, 36, 37(1), 40A(5), Art. 136]

Binny Ltd. v.Interim Board for Settlement (2024)469 ITR 597 / 158 taxmann.com 508 (Mad)(HC)

S. 245C : Settlement Commission-Settlement of cases-Payment of taxes and interest-Evidence of payment-Rejection of application is not valid. [Art. 226]

A. Rangasamy Engineers Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT (2024)469 ITR 620 (Mad)(HC)

S. 220 : Collection and recovery-Assessee deemed in default-Pendency of appeal-Purchase transaction-Bogus purchase-Not liable to submit seller’s stock register-Not liable to pay 25 Per Cent of demand.[S. 37, 156, 220(6), 250, Art. 226]

ARN Infrastructures India Ltd. v. ACIT. (2024)469 ITR 333/ 167 taxmann.com 38 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 153A: Assessment-Search-Reassessment-Completed or unabated assessments-Limitation-Liberty given to Revenue cannot be construed to have given liberty to Revenue from obligation to establish that reassessment proceedings are otherwise in accordance with law-Reassessment notice under section 148 and the consequential proceedings under section 147 were quashed. [S. 132, 147,148, 149(1), 150, 153C, Art. 226]

Jindal Exports and Imports Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2024)469 ITR 601 (Delhi)(HC) Kiran Credits Pvt Ltd v.Dy.CIT (2024)469 ITR 601 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 148A: Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Notices and orders not mentioning name and designation of concerned officers-Notices and orders are set aside.[S. 147, 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), 282A, Art. 226]

D. R. Jayakothandaraman v. Government of India (2024)469 ITR 557 / 148 taxmann.com 21 (Mad)(HC)

S. 148A: Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Principle of natural justice-Sufficient opportunity to be heard is not given-Order is not valid [S. 147, 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), Art. 226]

Bhoomi Construction Projects v. ITO (2024) 469 ITR 547 (Bom)(HC)

S.147: Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-No failure to disclose material facts-Reassessment is not valid. [S. 148, Art. 226]

PCIT v. Nokia Solutions and Networks India Pvt. Ltd. (2024)469 ITR 535 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 145 : Method of accounting-Rejection of accounts-Rule of consistency-Offering income to tax in year in which services rendered-Tax rate same and no loss to revenue-Rejection of books of account is not justified. [S. 260A]

Spartek Ceramics India Ltd. v. Add. CIT (2024)469 ITR 584 (AP)(HC)

S. 143(3): Assessment-Natural justice-24 hours time to respond notice-No adequate opportunity to respond to notice-Assessment order is quashed and set aside-Matter remanded. [S. 144B, Art. 226]

Vivek Krishnamoorthy v. PCIT (2024)469 ITR 605 (Karn)(HC)/Editorial . Affirmed by division bench , PCIT v. Vivek Krishnamoorthy (2025) 474 ITR 506/ 175 taxmann.com 681 (Karn)(HC)

S. 139 : Return of income-Delay in filing return-Limitation-Delay of five months-CBDT-Period to be computed with reference to date on which return had been filed -Refund – Order rejecting the application was set aside .[S.119(2)(b), 237 , Art. 226]