Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Pharmazell (India) (P) Ltd. v. ACIT (2025) 345 CTR 478 / 251 DTR 135 / 173 taxmann.com 181 (Mad)(HC). Editorial: Pharmazell (India) (P) Ltd. v. ACIT (2025) 345 CTR 486 / 251 DTR 144 (Mad)(HC), affirmed.

S. 147: Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Double deduction-Failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts-Reopening valid-Writ not maintainable when alternate remedy availed-Order of Single Judge affirmed.[S. 37(1), 148, Art. 226]

Enfinity Solar Solutions (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2025) 176 taxmann.com 170 / 345 CTR 739 / 251 DTR 473 (Mad)(HC)

S. 144C : Reference to Dispute Resolution Panel-Transfer pricing-Assessment pursuant to Tribunal remand-Failure to pass draft assessment order-Assessment order passed without complying with section 144C procedure is void and illegal..[S.92CA, 144C(1), Art. 226]

Shree Sarkhej Kelavani Mandal v. ADCIT (2025) 345 CTR 807 / 252 DTR 222 (Guj)(HC)

S. 143(3) : Assessment-Principle of natural justice —Strictures-Assessment order passed without granting or rejecting adjournment request-Systemic deficiencies in faceless assessment and portal functioning resulting in violation of rule of law-Assessment, penalty and demand orders quashed-Work Domain-Directions issued to strengthen tax administration and ensure compliance with Court orders-Costs were imposed on the Department. [S 156, 270A, Art. 226, 265]

Kalkajee Kraft Paper (P) Ltd. v. AUITD (2025) 345 CTR 793 / 305 Taxman 261 (Delhi)(HC).

S. 143(3) : Assessment-Principles of natural justice-Opportunity of being heard-Notices sent to email address available on MCA website-Assessee having participated in assessment proceedings precluded from objecting to service of notice-No violation of natural justice-Writ petition dismissed. [S. 142(1), 282, 292BB, R. 127(2)(b)(iii) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, Art. 226]

CIT v. Shankar Lall Goenka (2025) 481 ITR 690 / 305 Taxman 16 / 345 CTR 75 / 250 DTR 305 (Gauhati)(HC)

S. 143(3): Assessment-Notice under S. 143(2) issued by ITO lacking pecuniary jurisdiction-Assessee participated in proceedings before Dy. CIT without objection-Objection raised for first time before Tribunal barred by S. 292BB-Tribunal erred in quashing assessment-Matter remanded. [S. 143(2), 254(1), 260A, 292B, 292BB]

Shravan Kumar Pathak v. State of M.P. (2025) 345 CTR 433 / 251 DTR 377 / 175 taxmann.com 894 (MP)(HC).

S. 132A : Powers-Requisition of books of account, etc.-Assets in custody of Police-Criminal case-Stolen property seized by police-Department cannot claim possession by issuing notice under s. 132A-Separate proceeding can be initiated only after decision of Court. [CrPC, 1973, Ss. 397, 401, 457]

M.M. Varghese v. ACIT (Inv.) (2025) 345 CTR 86 / 250 DTR 201 (Ker.)(HC)

S. 132: Search and seizure-Authorisation-“Reason to believe”-Satisfaction not perverse-Search action valid-Prohibitory order under S. 132(3) ceases after 60 days by virtue of S. 132(8A). [S. 132(3), 132(8A), Art. 226]

52 Weeks Entertainment Ltd. v. PCIT (2025) 173 taxmann.com 615 / 345 CTR 233 / 250 DTR 401 (Bom)(HC)

S. 127 : Power to transfer cases-Revocation of transfer order during pendency of writ and finalisation of assessments-Volte-face without reasons-Strictures passed-CBDT and Ministry of Finance directed to conduct enquiry. [S. 119, 127(2), Art. 226]

Nikon Finlease (P.) Ltd. v. PCIT (2025) 175 taxmann.com 867 / 345 CTR 859 / 251 DTR 161 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 119 : Return-Condonation of delay-Genuine hardship-Clerical error in ITR-Incorrect ticking of audit information column resulting in rejection of return as invalid-Delay in filing revised return to cure defect to be condoned.[S. 44AB, 119(2)(b), 139, Art. 226]

CIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd. (2025) 345 CTR 747 / 252 DTR 65 (Bom)(HC)

S. 115JB : Company-Book profit-Interest under S. 234B-Binding precedent of Co-ordinate Benches-Revenue bound to disclose contrary judgments-Allegation that earlier judgments were “obtained” deprecated-The duty of fairness expected from the Revenue, the Court observed that binding precedents should not be suppressed or casually attacked-Appeal dismissed. [Ss. 234B, 260A]