Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Godrej Projects Development (P) Ltd. v.ITO (2024) 338 CTR 193/ 159 taxmann.com 32/471 ITR 493 (Bom) (HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment-With in four years-Change of opinion-Specific query was raised in the original assessment proceedings-Shares at premium-Borrowed satisfaction-Reassessment notice and order disposing the objection is quashed and set aside. [S. 68, 148, Art. 226]

Taeyang Metal India (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2024) 338 CTR 161/ 160 taxmann.com 536 (Mad) (HC)

S. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel-Assessment-Limitation-Order passed beyond one month of directions of DRP under S. 144C(13)-The assessment order was barred by limitation.[S. 143(3), 144C(13), Art. 226]

Wadakkancherry Service CoOperative Bank Ltd. v. ITO (2024) 338 CTR 752 (Ker) (HC) Editorial :Order of single judge is set aside, Wadakkancherry Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. v ITO (2024) 338 CTR 750 (Ker) (HC)

S. 144B : Faceless Assessment-Opportunity of hearing-Principle of natural justice-Opportunity of personal hearing was not given-Writ petition is dismissed. [Art. 226]

Wadakkancherry Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. v ITO (2024) 338 CTR 750 (Ker) (HC) Editorial :Order of single judge is set aside, Wadakkancherry Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. v ITO (2024) 338 CTR 750 (Ker) (HC)

S. 144B : Faceless Assessment-Opportunity of hearing-Principle of natural justice-Opportunity of personal hearing was not given-Order of single judge rejecting the petition is quashed and set aside. [Art. 226]

PCIT v. Ojasvi Motor Finance (P) Ltd. (2024) 338 CTR 964/ 163 taxmann.com 80 (Cal) (HC)

S. 143(3): Assessment-Transfer of case-Order passed by non-jurisdictional AO after transfer of case-Transfer of the PAN was only a consequential proceeding to the transfer of jurisdiction-Order is quashed and set aside by the Tribunal is affirmed. [S. 127, 260A]

Ayyappa Seva Samgham Bombay v. DCIT (2024) 338 CTR 632 / 161 taxmann.com 439// 467 ITR 672 (Bom) (HC)

S. 143(3) : Assessment-Remand-Appellate Tribunal-Order passed by AO beyond the directions of Tribunal-Order giving effect is quashed.-Change of opinion is not permissible – Entitle to refund with interest -Unexplained money – S. 115BBC(1) is not applicable to donations received as offerings from devotees -Strictures- Court also observed that “ For determining the taxes due the Assessing Officer should avoid bringing far -fetched and ideas . Without understanding the basic philosophy of income -tax , provisions are referred to so that any assessee can be taxed at any cost which is not fair or judicious approach to deal with the subjects of the State” [S. S. 11,12A, 44AB 69A, 115BBC(1), 254(1),263 , Form No 10B, Art.226 ]

R. Ravirajan v. State of Kerala (2024) 338 CTR 684/ 471 ITR 131 (Ker)(HC) Vijay Bharti v.UOI (2024) 338 CTR 684 /471 ITR 131 (Ker.)(HC)

S. 132A : Powers-Requisition of books of account-Cash seized by Police-S. 132A does not empower the Department to requisition a Court to deliver any seized assets, and the provision is referable only to an officer or authority-Order passed by the Magistrate is quashed-Asst.Director with whom the amounts were entrusted to return the amount released-The petitioner is directed to file the return disclosing the amount and Revenue is directed to finalise the assessment in accordance with law. [S. 132, 147, 148]

Baso Devi v. CBDT (2024) 338 CTR 105 / 161 taxmann.com 17 (P&H) (HC)

S. 119 : Central Board of Direct Taxes-Voluntary filing of return-Waiver or reduction-Interest under sections 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act [S. 119(2)(a),139, Form 15H, Art. 226]

PCIT v. Burda Druck India (P) Ltd [2023] 157 taxmann.com 563/(2024) 338 CTR 627 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 72 : Carry forward and set off of business losses-Carry forward and set off losses-Change in share holdings-Companies which public are not substantial interested-Tribunal was justified in directing the AO to expunge the concluding remark brought forward loss is not allowed to be carry forward-Unabsorbed depreciation and capital losses do not fall within the scope and ambit of S. 79 [S.32(2), 79, 254(1), 260A, 1922 ITACT, S. 24(2), 24(3)]

KHR Hospitality India Ltd. v. CIT (2024) 338 CTR 761 (Cal) (HC)

S.43B: Deductions on actual payment-Interest paid to financial institutions-Reassessment-Claim for deduction not made earlier-No original assessment-Assessment order pursuant to original and revised return-Claim made during assessment proceedings-Allowable as deduction. [S.43B, 139(5), 147(b), 260A]