Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Rajeev Bansal v. UOI (2023)453 ITR 153/ 331 CTR 609/ 223 DTR 177 / 147 taxmann.com 549 (All)(HC) www.itatonline.org

S. 148A: Reassessment – Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before the issue of notice – Limitation – Notices issued pursuant to the case of UOI v. Ashish Agarwal (2022) 444 ITR 1/ 213 DTR 217/ 326 CTR 473/ 286 Taxman / AIR 2022 SC 2781 (SC) – Notice issued on or after 01.04.2021, the period concerned is between 01.04.2021 to 30.06.2021-Relaxation Act will not apply – the law as per Finance Act, 2021 has to be followed.-CBDT Instructions No.1 of 2022 (2022) 444 ITR 43 ( St)- Interpretation Of Taxing Statutes — Strict Interpretation. [S. 119, 147, 148, 148A(d), 149, 151, 151A, Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation & Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020, S. 3(1), CBDT Notification, 31-3-2021, Art. 226]

Muthoot Leasing and Finance Ltd. v. CIT (2023) 450 ITR 496 /292 Taxman 5 / 330 CTR 209 (SC)

S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Finding of fact-High Court must frame the substantial question of law-Order setting aside the order of Tribunal was quashed and set aside-Order of Tribunal was affirmed. [Interest-tax Act, 1974, S. 2(5A), 2(5B), 2(7)]

ITO(IT) v. Gia Laboratory Pvt. Ltd. (2023) 450 ITR 11 (SC) Editorial: Refer Gia Laboratory Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO(IT) (2023) 450 ITR 7 (Bom)(HC), affirmed.

S. 201 : Deduction at source-Failure to deduct or pay-Payments to non-resident-Tribunal setting aside order holding assessee in default-High court affirming Tribunal-Question of taxability in case of recipient pending before high court-Order of High court affirmed with direction to assessing officer to proceed in matter after decision of high court in pending appeals. [S. 260A, Art. 32]

Devendra Babulal Jain v. ITO (2023) 450 ITR 520 (Guj.)(HC)

S. 179 : Private company-Liability of directors-Recovery of tax-Private company-liability primarily that of company-Assessing officer to make efforts for recovery of tax from company-Directors showing that non-recovery of tax not attributable to their gross negligence, misfeasance or breach of duty-Order against directors was quashed. [S. 156, Art. 226]

PCIT v. Subodh Agarwal (2023) 450 ITR 526 (All)(HC)

S. 153A : Assessment-Search or requisition-Sanction non application of mind-Prior approval of prescribed authority in respect of each assessment year is mandatory-Sanction of prescribed authority for 38 cases granted on single day-Assessing officer passing draft assessment order and final assessment order on same day of approval-Approval illegal and non est-Order of Tribunal was up held. [S. 132, 153D, 260A]

PCIT v. Siddarth Gupta (2023) 450 ITR 534 / 330 CTR 295 (All)(HC)

S. 153A : Assessment-Search or requisition-Sanction of prescribed authority-Mechanical sanction-Assessing officer passing draft assessment order and on same day approving authority granting approval for 123 assessees-impossible for a person to apply his mind on all cases for all in a single day-Approval is illegal and non est. [S. 132, 153D, 260A]

Rajesh Kumar Agarwal and Sons (HUF) v. UOI (2023) 450 ITR 545 (Cal.)(HC)

S. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Principle of natural justice-Failure to afford opportunity of hearing-Order and notices set aside-Matter remanded to assessing officer. [S. 147, 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), Art. 226]

Radha Styores Pvt. Ltd. v. UOI (2023) 450 ITR 543 (Cal.)(HC)

S. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Principle of natural justice-Order passed without considering the reply-Order set aside-Matter remanded to assessing officer to consider reply and afford opportunity of hearing. [S. 147, 148A(b), 148A(d), Art. 226]

R N Fashion v. UOI (No. 2) (2023) 450 ITR 134/ 331 CTR 209 (Cal.)(HC) Editorial: Order of single judge, set aside, R N Fashion v. UOI (No 1) (2023) 450 ITR 132 / 331 CTR 215 (Cal)(HC)

S. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Principle of natural justice-Reply was uploaded on Monday immediately after public holiday and Saturday and Sunday-Order for issue of show-cause notice without considering reply-Order passed in haste reducing procedure to nullity-A purposive interpretation needs to be given to the statutory provision-Matter was remanded-Directed the respondent to pay cost of Rs. 15000, however on request of the Departmental counsel who has assured that he will take responsibility of conveying as to what would mean by “reasonable opportunity to the assessee“-Portion of direction imposing cost on the Departmental Officer was deleted. [S. 147, 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), Art. 226]

Dr. Mathew Cherian v. ACIT (2023) 450 ITR 568 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Survey-Salary or professional income-Remuneration is not taxable as salary-Remuneration of Doctors working in hospital-Issue of notice without examining the contracts between hospital and doctors-Order and notice not valid. [S. 133A, 147, 148, 148A(d), 149A(d), 192, Art. 226]