Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Nitn Nagarkar v. ITO( Bom)(HC) , www.itatonline .org .

S. 281 : Certain transfers to be void -Natural justice – Order passed without giving an opportunity of hearing – Bad in law -Tax recovery Officer has no jurisdiction to examine whether the transfer is void-Order was quashed . [S. 222, Rule 11 of the Second Schedule, Art , 226, Transfer of Property Act , 1882, S.53 ]

Raje Dudh Utpadak Sahakari Sanstha Ltd. v. ITO (2022) 93 ITR 67 (SN) (Pune)(Trib.) Shriram Dudh Vyvasayaik Sahakari Sanstha Ltd. v. ITO (2022) 93 ITR 67 (SN) (Pune)(Trib.) Shriram Sahakari Dudh Utpadak Shstha Ltd. v. ITO (2022) 93 ITR 67 (SN) (Pune)(Trib.) Dhaval Singh mohite Patil Sahakari Dudh Utpadak Sanstha Ltd. v. ITO (2022) 93 ITR 67 (SN) (Pune)(Trib.) Shri Siddhanath Dudh Utpadak Sahakari Sanstha Ltd. v. ITO (2022) 93 ITR 67 (SN) (Pune)(Trib.) Sonar Siddha Sahakari Dudh Utpadak Sanstha Ltd. v. ITO (2022) 93 ITR 67 (SN) (Pune)(Trib.)

S. 271B : Penalty-Failure to get accounts audited-Co-Operative Society-Receipt of Grant-In-Aid from Government of Maharashtra at predetermined rates on which tax deducted at source-Accounts audited under Co-Operative Societies Act-If amount of grant-in-aid excluded, turnover below limit specified-Reasonable cause for not getting accounts audited-Levy of penalty is not valid. [S. 44AB, 273B]

Karamsad Nagrik Co-Op. Credit Society Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2022) 93 ITR 17 (SN) (Ahd.)(Trib.)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Co-Operative Society-Interest income from Nationalised Banks incorporated in financial statements-Shown as income from other sources-Levy of penalty is not valid. [S. 80P(2)(a)(i)]

ITO v. Karad Janata Sahakari Bank Ltd. (2022) 93 ITR 79 (SN) (Pune)(Trib.)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Co-Operative Bank Disallowance of claim-Levy of penalty is not valid. [S. 36(1)(viia)]

Starline Organics Pvt. Ltd. v. PCIT (2022) 93 ITR 22 (SN) (Ahd.) (Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Purchases from Special Economic Zone unit claimed as deemed import-Value added tax input on deemed import as expense in Profit and Loss Account-Order passed by Assessing Officer erroneous-Revision valid. [S. 143(3)]

Starline Organics Pvt. Ltd. v. PCIT (2022) 93 ITR 22 (SN) (Ahd.)(Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Purchases from Special Economic Zone unit claimed as deemed import-Value added tax input on deemed import as expense in Profit and Loss Account-Order passed by Assessing Officer erroneous-Revision valid. [S. 143(3)]

Chettinad Lignite Transport Services Pvt. Ltd. v. PCIT (2022) 93 ITR 74 (SN) (Chennnai)(Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Failure to examine expenditure incurred with reference to dividend income-Revision is held to be valid. [S. 14A, 8D(2)(iii)]

Ashdan Developers Pvt. Ltd. v. PCIT (2022) 93 ITR 6 (SN) (Pune) (Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Share premium-Report of expert-PCIT is not entitled to reject valuation report in absence of report from another expert. [S. 56(2)(vii)]

Anil Rambhai Mevad v. PCIT (2022) 93 ITR 8 (SN) (Ahd.)(Trib.) Deepakkumar Rambhai Mevada v. PCIT (2022) 93 ITR 8 (SN) (Ahd.)(Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Capital gains-Capital asset-Relinquishment of right in asset-Compensation-Right to sue-Compensation correctly assessed as capital gains-Revision to assess the compensation as income from other sources is held to be not valid. [S. 2(14), 45, 56]

Actia (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. PCIT (2022) 93 ITR 65 (SN) (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Transfer pricing adjustment-Failure by Assessing Officer to make assessment in conformity with order of Transfer Pricing Officer-Revision is valid. [S. 92CA]