Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Daisy v. PCIT (2023)154 taxmann.com 431 / (2024) 336 CTR 340 (Ker)(HC)

S. 239 : Refunds-Limitation-Central Board of Direct Taxes-Refund-Rejection of application on condonation of delay-Order of Commissioner is affirmed.[S.119(2)(b), Art. 226]

Chintan Bindra v. CIT (2024)158 taxmann.com 27 / 336 CTR 643 (Delhi) (HC)

S. 205 : Deduction at source-Bar against direct demand-Tax deducted at source on salary-Employer has not deposited with Department-Assessee could not be penalized for failure of employer to perform his duty to deposit deducted tax.[S.192, 199, Art. 226]

PCIT v. Jasjit Singh (2024) 336 CTR 634 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 199 : Deduction at source-Credit for tax deducted-Failure to deposit the tax deducted by the deductor-Deductee cannot be denied the credit for tax deducted. [S.199(1), 221, 260A, 271C R.]

Chennimalai Siragiri Murugan Primary Handloom Weaver’s Cooperative Society Ltd. v. ITO (2023)157 taxmann.com 636 / (2024) 336 CTR 419// 467 ITR 699 (Mad)(HC)

S. 194N : Payment of certain amounts in cash-Deduction at source-Interest other than interest on securities-co-operative society-Circulars issued by Tamil Nadu State Apex Co -Operative Bank directing assessee-Co-operative society to comply with sections 194N and 194A is valid-Constitutional validity is affirmed. [S. 194A, Art, 226]

CIT v. Madhuri Sharma (Smt.) (2024) 336 CTR 362 (Pat) (HC)

S. 158BE : Block assessment-Time limit-No statement was taken of assessee-No substantial question of law. [S. 132,132A, 158BC, 260A]

Satyendra Kumar v. CIT (2024) 336 CTR 619 (Pat) (HC)

S. 158BC : Block assessment-Search-Undisclosed income-Disclosure was made in the return filed after search action-Income from HUF-Return was not filed-Addition is justified-No substantial question of law.[S. 132, 158BB, 260A]

CIT v. Goldstone Cements Ltd. (2024) 336 CTR 448 (Gauhati)(HC)

S. 153A: Assessment-Search-Electronic device in the form of a hard drive extracted from the computer of the assessee-Reappreciation of evidence-No substantial question of law.[S. 68, 132, 260A]

Indian Renewable Energy Development Agency Ltd. v. PCIT (2024) 336 CTR 651 (Delhi) (HC)

S. 153 : Assessment-Reassessment-Limitation-Time barred assessment-Refund-Remand by Tribunal-Assessing Officer is directed to accept the return of income as available on record and pass the consequential orders. [S. 139, 153(2A), 153(3)]

Nitin Sharma v. PCIT (2024) 336 CTR 126 (MP)(HC)

S. 149 : Reassessment-Time limit for notice-Search-There is no restriction of time period for issuance of notice under S. 148-Petition is dismissed. [S.132, 132A, 148, 149(1), 153A, 153C, Art. 226]

Bijendra Singh v. PCIT (2024) 336 CTR 819 (Raj) (HC)

S. 149 : Reassessment-Time limit for notice-Amount is less than 50 lakhs-Notice issued beyond three years-Order is barred by limitation. [S.148, 148A(b), 148A(d), Art. 226]