Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


PCIT v. C. M. Rajgarhia (P.) Ltd. (2023) 294 Taxman 288 /(2024) 336 CTR 606(Cal)(HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to Revenue-Tax on distributed income to shareholders-Revision order barred by limitation-Provisions not applicable for the year under consideration. [S. 115QA(1), 154, The Companies Act, S. 77, 402]

PCIT v. H.T.L Ltd. (2023) 294 Taxman 38 // (2024) 467 ITR 163 ((Delhi)(HC)/Editorial : SLP of Revenue is dismissed , PCIT v .HTL LTD. (2024)467 ITR 573 / 300 taxman 598 (SC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-
Capital gains-Full value of consideration-Stamp valuation-Land was sold by secured creditors-Order of Tribunal quashing the revision order is affirmed. [S. 45, 50C, 143(1), The Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act)]

PCIT v. Spicer India Ltd (No. 2) (2023) 458 ITR 42/ 294 Taxman 740 (Bom)(HC)

S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Appeal-Appeal against the assessment order and revision order-Both orders to be heard together. [S. 10B(7), 80IA (8), 263]

DIT (IT) v. Western Union Financial Services Inc (2023) 459 ITR 56 / 153 taxmann.com 703 (Delhi)(HC) Editorial: Delay was condoned and the order of High Court is set aside to decide on merit, DIT (IT) v. Western Union Financial Services Inc. (2023) 459 ITR 58 /294 Taxman 704 / 333 CTR 450 (SC).

S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Delay of 1110 days-Delay was due to change in their Standing Counsel and previous counsel’s failure to inform them about appeal’s status-Delay was not condoned-Appeal was dismissed.

CIT v. Surya Vinayaka Industries Ltd. (2023) 153 taxmann.com 676 (Delhi)(HC) Editorial : Delay was condoned and the order of High Court is set aside to decide on merit, CIT (C) v. Surya Vinayaka Industries Ltd. (2023) 456 ITR 773 / 294 Taxman 702 (SC)

S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Delay of 707 days-Sufficient cause-Heavy workload-Lack of man power-Delay was not condoned-[S. 263, Art. 226]

CIT (C) v. Surya Vinayaka Industries Ltd. (2023) 456 ITR 773 / 294 Taxman 702 /(2024) 337 CTR 375(SC) Editorial : CIT v. Surya Vinayaka Industries Ltd. (2023) 153 taxmann.com 676 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Delay of 707 days-Sufficient cause-Heavy workload-Lack of man power-Delay was condoned-Directed the High Court to decide on merits.[S. 263, Art. 136]

DIT (IT) v. Western Union Financial Services Inc. (2023) 459 ITR 58 /294 Taxman 704 / 333 CTR 450 (SC) Editorial : DIT (IT) v. Western Union Financial Services Inc (2023) 459 ITR 56 / 153 taxmann.com 703 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Delay of 1110 days-Delay was due to change in their Standing Counsel and previous counsel’s failure to inform them about appeal’s status-Matter was to be restored to High Court-Cost of Rs 5000 was imposed. [Art. 136]

PCIT v. MSPL Ltd. (2023) 454 ITR 280 /294 Taxman 74 /332 CTR 606 (SC) Editorial: PCIT v. MSPL Ltd (2021) 436 ITR 199 / 127 taxmann.com 379 (Bom)(HC)

S. 255 : Appellate Tribunal-Procedure-Functions-Transferring four appeals of assessee from Bangalore Bench to Mumbai Bench-Jurisdiction of concerned High Court would depend upon where seat of Assessing Officer was and, Assessing Officer who passed order-SLP of Revenue is dismissed. [Art. 136]

Madhu Korah v. ITD (2023) 294 Taxman 63 (Jharkhand)(HC)

S. 251 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Powers-Remand proceedings-Cross examination-Revenue is directed to provide effective cross examination as per the provisions of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. [S. 250, Indian Evidence Act, 1872]

Mahesh Gupta v. ITSC (2023) 294 Taxman 537 / 335 CTR 251/(2024)461 ITR 267 (Bom)(HC)

S. 245HA : Settlement Commission-Abatement of proceedings-Shortfall on additional taxes and interest-Subsequently intimated-Abatement invalid. [S. 245C, 245D(2A), Art. 226]