Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


PCIT (C) v. Padma Kumar Jain (2023) 455 ITR 679 / 290 Taxman 394 (Jhakahd)(HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Revision was done twice-Revision for the third time is held to be not valid. [S. 143(3), 153A]

Himanshu Kukreja v. PCIT (2023) 290 Taxman 453 (Uttarakhand) (HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Unexplained investments-Assessing Officer has not enquired into any documentary evidence-Revision was held to be justified. [S. 69]

Mangali Mahinag v. Sushila Sahu (2023) 290 Taxman 563 (Chhattisgarh)(HC)

S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Writ-Statutory remedy-Alternative remedy-Writ petition was pending for 13 years-Affirming the order of a single judge division bench held that as a proposition of law, it cannot be countenanced that once a writ petition is entertained and admitted, same can’t be dismissed on the ground of availability of alternative remedy at the time of hearing. [Art. 226]

UOI v. G.M. Foods (2023) 452 ITR 100/290 Taxman 446 / 223 DTR 239/ 331 CTR 475 (SC) Editorial: Arising out of order of High Court in. G.M. Foods v. IT& WT Settlement Commission (2015) 58 taxmann.com 16 /231 Taxman 793 (Cal)(HC)

S. 234B : Interest-Advance tax-Interest would be computed up to date of admission of application by Settlement Commission under section 245D(1) and not up to date of order of settlement Commission under section 245D(4)-Natural justice-Order was passed without giving an opportunity to the Revenue-Order of by High Court was quashed and the matter was remanded to decide writ petition afresh [S. 245D(1) 245D(4)]

CIT, TDS v. Mewar Hospital (P.) Ltd. (2023) 290 Taxman 389 (Raj.)(HC)

S. 194J : Deduction at source-Fees for professional or technical services-Salary-Hospital-Retainership fees paid to doctors-Provisions of section 194J are applicable not provision of section 192 of the Act. [S. 192]

PCIT v. Suman Agarwal (2023) 290 Taxman 301 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 153A : Assessment-Search or requisition-No incriminating material was found-Deletion of addition by the Tribunal was justified. [S. 132, 69B]

Nidhi Bindal v. ITO (2023) 290 Taxman 306 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Violation of the principle of natural justice-Mandatory to give the minimum time of seven days-Reply of assesee was not considered-Order and notice was set aside. [S. 148A(b), 148A(d), Art. 226]

Sangeeta Arora (Mrs.) v. ITO (2023) 290 Taxman 391 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Unexplained money-Misuse of GST number by third party-Factual issue-Writ petition was dismissed-Directed the Assessing Officer to consider merits of the controversy and decide according to the law. [S. 148A(b), Art. 226]

Boutique International (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2023) 290 Taxman 403 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 148A: Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Cash credits-Bogus accommodation entries-No details mentioned-Order was set aside for fresh determination. [S. 148, 148A(b) 148A(d), Art, 226]

Wilfred D’Souza v. ITO (2023) 290 Taxman 267 (Karn.)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment-Within four years-Capital gains-No failure to disclose material facts-Reassessment notice and order disposing of the objection was quashed. [S. 45, 68, 148, Art. 226]