Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Sushil Kumar Goyal v. P CIT (2023) 293 Taxman 653 /333 CTR 464/ 226 DTR 345 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 245C : Settlement Commission-Settlement of cases-Case-There was no case pending in relation to assessment years on date of respective applications-Any proceeding for assessment under this Act-Application for the Assessment year 2012-13 and 2013-14 are held to be not maintainable-Applications in respect of assessment years 2014-15, 2015-16, and 2016-17 were maintainable because in terms of Explanation (iv) proceedings for said assessment years were not concluded on date on which assessees had filed their respective applications-Order of Settlement Commission was affirmed.[S.148, 245A,Art. 226]

Goa Forest Development Corporation v. PCIT (2023) 293 Taxman 62 /333 CTR 509 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 220 : Collection and recovery-Assessee deemed in default-Assessing Officer failed to disclose reasons while rejecting stay application and Commissioner (Appeals) also failed to consider stay application considering financial hardships-Assessee was directed to deposit 10 per cent of disputed demand-Matter remanded. [S. 144, 156, 250, Art. 226]

PCIT v. Lanshree Products & Services Ltd. (2023) 293 Taxman 53 (Cal.)(HC)

S. 154 : Rectification of mistake-Mistake apparent from the record-Book profit-Claim of set off of book loss or unabsorbed depreciation upto assessment year 2014-15-Debatable issue-Order of Tribunal allowing the appeal of the assessee is affirmed. [S. 115JB]

KPL Assets LLP v. ACIT (2023) 293 Taxman 474 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 153A : Assessment-Search-Assessment orders were passed without giving reasons as to why department had not granted specific time despite petitioner’s specific request-Assessment orders were quashed and matters to be remanded back to department for fresh consideration.[S. 143(3), 153B, Art. 226]

Micro Chem v. UOI (2023) 293 Taxman 608 (Guj.)(HC)

S. 149 : Reassessment-Time limit for notice-Limitation of six years from end of relevant assessment year-All original notices under section 148 referable to old regime and issued between 1-4-2021 to 30-6-2021 would stand beyond prescribed permissible timeline of six years from end of assessment year 2013-14 and assessment year 2014-15-All notices they would relate to assessment year 2013-14 or assessment year 2014-15 would be time barred as per provisions of Act as applicable in old regime prior to 1-4-2021-These notices could not have been issued as per amended provisions of Act-Notice dated 26-5-2022 issued by respondent-Assessing Officer under section 148, seeking to reopen assessment in respect of assessment year 2014-15 and order dated 30-6-2022 passed under section 148A(d), and all consequential actions, were quashed and set aside-Circulars and Notifications : Notification No. 38 of 2021, dated 27-4-2021.[S. 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), Art. 226]

Rahul Aggarwal v. ITO (2023) 293 Taxman 57 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Dissonance between input received from insight portal-Non application of mind-Order and notice were set aside. [S. 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), Art. 226]

Vertex International (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2023) 149 taxmann.com 480 (Delhi)(HC) Editorial : SLP of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn, Vertex International (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2023) 293 Taxman 72 (SC)

S. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Revenue had failed to furnish any (S. 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), Art. 226]

Deepak Kumar Yadav v. PCIT (2023) 293 Taxman 694/(2024) 460 ITR 50 /336 CTR 393 (All.)(HC)

S. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Purchase of arecanut (Supari)-Failure to give an opportunity of cross examination-Non existence of sellers-Formation of opinion by authority concerned under section 148A(d), could not be questioned on basis of detailed defence setup by assessee on merits of information, including opportunity of cross-examining seller or by demanding documents relating to such information-Writ petition is dismissed. [S. 69A, 143(1), 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), Art. 226]

Pawan Girishbhai Batavia v. ITO (2023) 293 Taxman 179 (Guj.)(HC)

S. 148A: Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Non-Resident Indian-Investment in shares-Automatic route of FDI-Violation of principle of natural justice-Matter was sent back to concerned officer from stage where he committed serious error in not complying with statutory requirements-Order passed under section 148A(d) was quashed and set-aside. [S. 56(2)(vii), 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), Art. 226]

Crescent EPC Projects and Technical Services Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2023) 293 Taxman 462 (Telangana)(HC)

S. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Civil construction-Objections were dealt with in a very mechanical manner-Order and notice were to be set aside and matter was to be remanded back to pass a fresh order in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of personal hearing.[S. 48, 148A(b), 148A(d), Art. 226]