Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Suresh Kumar Agarwal v. UOI (2023) 456 ITR 148/ 291 Taxman 258 / 332 CTR 762/ 225 DTR 499(Jharkhand)(HC)

S. 276CC : Offences and prosecutions-Failure to furnish return of income-Filed belated return and also deposited amount of tax along with interest for delay which was accepted by authority concerned-No sentence could be imposed u/s 276CC of the Act [S.. 153A, 279(1). Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, S 397]

P.S. Mallikarjun v. ITO (2023) 291 Taxman 275 (Mad.)(HC) Editorial: Order of single Judge is modified, P.S. Mallikarjun v. ITO (WP No.20575 of 2022 dt. 11-8-2022 (Mad)(HC)

S. 276C : Offences and prosecutions-Willful attempt to evade tax-Failure to disclose capital gain tax-Civil suit-Cost of Rs.50000 was expunged-Writ petition was dismissed-Civil Judge was directed to dispose the case preferably within a period of twelve months. [Indian Evidence Act, 1872, S.120, Art. 226]

PCIT v. Jayashree Jayakar Mohanka (Smt.) (2023) 291 Taxman 273 (Cal) (HC)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Additions was deleted-Penalty order was quashed.

PCIT v. Bharat Infra Tech (P.) Ltd. [2022] 291 Taxman 185 (Karn)(HC)

S. 268A : Appeal-Instructions-Circulars-Monetary limits-Tax liability below 1 crore-Department appeal was dismissed.[S. 260A]

Rajendra Singh v. UOI (2022) 291 Taxman 168 (MP)(HC)

S. 264 : Commissioner-Revision of other orders-Rejecting the prayer for withdrawal of revision petition-Deciding on merit-Order set aside and remanded. [Art.226]

PCIT v. Naga Dhunseri Group Ltd. (2023) 291 Taxman 278 (Cal.)(HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Limited scrutiny-Mismatch of amount paid to related persons-Verification of expenditure-The issue which was not subject matter of limited scrutiny-Revision order to disallowance of expenditure under section 14A was quashed.[S. 14A, 40A(2)(b), 57]

PCIT v. Pawa Infrastructure (P.) Ltd. (2023) 457 ITR 392/291 Taxman 297 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Capital asset-Lease hold right-Capital or revenue-Cancellation of allotment of plot of land-Compensation-Treated as capital-receipt Revision order was quashed. [S. 2(14), 4, 28(i)]

PCIT v. Reeta Lakhmani (2023) 291 Taxman 358 (Cal)(HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Initiation of proceedings based on a proposal given by the assessing officer-Without application of mind-Revision was quashed. [S. 10(38) 45]

Embassy Brindavan Developers v. CIT (2023) 457 ITR 234/ 291 Taxman 188 (Karn)(HC).Editorial : Notice issued in SLP filed by the Revenue , CIT v. Embassy Brindavan Developers (2023) 294 Taxman 437 (SC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Purchase and sale of land-Capital asset-Intention to construct a Tech Park-No development activity-Revision is held to be not valid. [S. 2(14),28(i), 45, 143(3)]

PCIT v. Sanjay Dhingra (2023)457 ITR 588/ 291 Taxman 291 (Cal)(HC)/PCIT v. Sidhant Gupta ( 2023) 457 ITR 588/ 291 Taxman 291 (Cal)( HC)

S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal-Duties-Failure of Tribunal examine the matter on merits-Matter remanded. [S. 260A, 271 A ABB, 273B]