Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Rotluanga Stephen v. ITO (2024) 115 ITR 15 (SN) / [2025] 170 taxmann.com 241 (Gauhati)(Trib)

S.271AAC : Penalty in respect of certain income-Unexplained cash deposit-Addition deleted-Levy of penalty is deleted. [S.69A]

Mukesh Kumar Ranka v.ACIT (2024)115 ITR 133 (Indore)(Trib) Anju Jain v. ACIT (2024)115 ITR 133 (Indore)(Trib)

S. 271AAB : Penalty-Search initiated on or after Ist day of July 2012-Undisclosed income-Mere surrender of income is not sufficient to levy the penalty-Penalty is deleted.[S. 132, 132(4),153A]

Prakash Khatri v. PCIT (2024) 115 ITR 1 (SN)(Ahd)(Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Cash credits-Sale of property-Showing company as seller-26AS showing tax deducted at source-Sub-Registrar’s Letter stating no sale transaction is specified-Incorrect income calculation rectifiable-Revision order is quashed. [S. 154]

Posco India P. Ltd. v.Dy. CIT (2024) 115 ITR 3 (SN) (Cuttack)(Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Business loss-Set-off of brought-forward loss of earlier year in current year is unjustified-Revision is valid-Direction of Commissioner to reduce interest from the cost of project is not valid-Revision is not justified. [S. 28(i), 143(3)]

Gautam Nipinbhai Nagarsheth v. PCIT (2024) 115 ITR 66 (SN) (Ahd)(Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Income from other sources-Interest-Failure to conduct adequate inquiries-Interest paid and received-Justification for claiming interest-Without identifying any specific error in the order-Revision order is quashed. [S. 56, 57(iii), 143(3)]

Tata Sons Ltd. v. CIT (2024)115 ITR 272 / 158 taxmann.com 601 (Mum)(Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Capital gains-Capital loss-Loss on reduction of shares-Assessable as capital loss-Capital loss can be set off against any other capital gains-Transfer-Reduction of capital resulting in extinguishment of right on shares amounts to transfer-Two possible views-Revision is not valid. [S. 2(47), 143(3)]

Arati Ray v.Dy. CIT (2024)115 ITR 1 (Kol)(Trib) Mallika Roy v.Dy. CIT (2024)115 ITR 1 (Kol)(Trib) Samit Roy v.Dy. CIT (2024)115 ITR 1 (Kol)(Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Capital gains-Search and seizure-Stamp duty valuation-No new discovery of fact-Order of revision is quashed. [S. 45,48, 50C, 153A]

Anchita Properties P. Ltd. v. ITO (2024)115 ITR 401 (Kol)(Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Limitation-Reassessment order is quashed by Tribunal-Original order sought to be revised in revision proceedings is barred by limitation-No error in assessment order-Revision order is quashed.[S.133(6), 143(3), 147, 148]

Avaya India P. Ltd. v. ACIT (2024) 115 ITR 23 (SN) (Delhi)(Trib)

S. 254(2A) : Appellate Tribunal-Stay-Non application of mind by the Assessing Officer-Recovery of outstanding demand is stayed for 180 days from date of the order till disposal of appeal, which ever is earlier. [S. 154, 254(1)]

Hemant V. More v. ACIT (2024) 115 ITR 43 (SN)(Mum)(Trib)

S. 249 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Form of appeal and limitation-Delay of 454 days is condoned-Survey-Non payment of admitted tax-Matter remitted to Commissioner (Appeals) to decide on merit for fresh consideration.[S.133A, 249(3) 249(4)(b)]