Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Xiaomi Technology India Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2023) 451 ITR 58 / 330 ITR 113 / 221 DTR 225 // 291 Taxman 315 (Karn.)(HC)

S. 281B : Provisional attachment-Mere apprehension that huge demand would be made is not sufficient-Tangible reasons are required-Grant of approval cannot be mechanical-Approval for attachment cannot be given without considering facts. [Art. 226]

Rajinder Kumar v. State. (2023) 451 ITR 338 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 276C : Offences and prosecutions-Wilful attempt to evade tax-Failure to produce accounts and documents-Admission regarding Foreign Bank account after an investigation by department-Revised return was filed after issue of notice-Failure to disclose foreign account opened in year 1991 when the assessee was 55 years of age-Cannot take benefit of circular recommending any prosecution where the assessee is aged 70 years or more at time of offence-Launching of prosecution is justified. [S. 132, 153A, 271, 271(1)(b), 274, 276C(1), 276D, 277, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, S. 245(2), Central Board Of Direct Taxes Instruction No. 5051, Dated 7-2-1991]

PCIT v. Rishikesh Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. (2023)451 ITR 108 (Delhi)(HC) PCIT v. Rishikesh Properties Pvt. Ltd. (2023) 451 ITR 108 (Delhi)(HC) PCIT v. Rupa Promoters Pvt. Ltd. (2023) 451 ITR 108 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 275 : Penalty-Bar of limitation-Limitation-Limitation starts from the date of assessment when the Assessing Officer initiates penalty proceedings and not from the date of sanction for penalty proceedings. [S. 271D, 275(1)(c)]

PCIT v. Bechtel India Pvt. Ltd. (2023) 451 ITR 208 / 330 CTR 400 (Delhi)(HC) Editorial: Order in Bechtel India Pvt. Ltd. v. Add CIT (2021) 86 ITR 544 (Delhi)(Trib), affirmed.

S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-International transactions-Arm’s length price-Comparable-Question of fact. [S. 92C]

Sark Cable Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO (2023) 451 ITR 167 (Ker.)(HC)

S. 234E : Fee-Default in furnishing the statements-Levy of the late fee applicable only from 1-6-2015. [S. 200A(1), Art. 226]

Tata Teleservices Ltd. v. CIT(IT) (2023) 451 ITR 328 (Delhi)(HC)

S 226 : Collection and recovery-Modes of recovery-Pendency of appeal before CIT(A)-Deduction of tax at source-Failure to consider prima facie case-Payment of 20 per cent. of disputed tax demand is not a prerequisite for a stay of demand-Order set aside and matter remanded to Commissioner (IT) to consider afresh [S. 201(1), 201(IA), 246A, Art. 226]

Humuza Consultants v. ACIT (2023)451 ITR 77/ 330 CTR 192 / 221 DTR 57 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 226 : Collection and recovery-Modes of recovery-Stay of demand-Commissioner (Appeals)-High-pitched assessment-Rejection of stay application without considering the additional evidence-Held to be not justified. [S. 10(34), 246A, 251, Rule, 46A Art. 226]

WTS Energy DMCC v. Dy. CIT (2023) 451 ITR 175 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 197 : Deduction at source-Certificate for a lower rate-Payments to Non-Resident-Fees for technical services-No article contained in double taxation avoidance agreement-Department directed to issue a certificate at withholding rate of four Per Cent-Contentions of parties left open-DTAA-India-UAE. [Art. 226]

Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition (General) v. Government of India (2023) 451 ITR 484 (Ker.)(HC)

S. 201 : Deduction at source-Failure to deduct or pay-Interest for delay in remitting tax deducted at source-No liability for interest if tax is not deductible at source. [S. 2(14), 201(IA), Art. 226]

K. L. Swamy v. CIT (2023) 451 ITR 1 / 221 DTR 401 / 330 CTR 457 / 291 Taxman 502 (SC) K.L. Srihari v. CIT (2023) 451 ITR 1 / 221 DTR 401 / 330 CTR 457 (SC) Universal Trading Co. v. CIT (2023) 451 ITR 1 (SC) Gayathri Foundation v. CIT (2023) 451 ITR 1 (SC) Koday India Ltd. v. CIT (2023) 451 ITR 1 / 221 DTR 401 / 330 CTR 457 (SC) Khoday Breweries Ltd. v. CIT (2023)451 ITR 1 (SC) Editorial : Decision in CIT v. K.L. Srihari (2011) 335 ITR 215 (Karn)(HC), reversed on this point.

S. 158BD : Block assessment-Undisclosed income of any other person-Search and seizure-Delay in filing of returns-Interest leviable-Assessment of third person notice under section 158BD is sufficient-Not necessary to issue separate notice u/s. 158BC of the Act. [S. 140A(1), 158BC, 158BFA(1)]