Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


M. J. Engineering Consultants P. Ltd. v. ITO (2022) 449 ITR 322 / 217 DTR 273/ 328 CTR 462 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 237 : Refunds-Intimation-Right of assessee-Failure by Department to process return within prescribed time-Direction issued to Department to grant refund with interest. [S. 139, 140. 140A, 143(1), 244A, Art. 226]

State Bank of India v. CIT (2022) 449 ITR 192 / 329 CTR 449 / 219 DTR 369 / 144 taxmann.com 131/(2023) 290 Taxman 129 (SC) Editorial : State Bank of India v. CIT (ITA No. 5 of 2020 dt. 13-1-2020(Delhi)(HC), affirmed.

S. 201 : Deduction at source-Failure to deduct or pay-Leave travel concession-Estimate of income-Assessee in default Public sector Bank-Employees travelling not only to domestic destination but to foreign countries-Not taking shortest possible route-Employees not entitled to exemption-Leave travel concession reimbursed without deduction of tax at source-Assessee could not claim ignorance about travel plans of employees-Complete facts available-Not a bona fide mistake-Liable to pay interest. [S. 10(5), 192(1), 201(1), ITR. 2B]

CIT(TDS) v. Jai Prakash Associates Ltd. (2022) 449 ITR 183 / 290 Taxman 124 / 330 CTR 627/ 222 DTR 199(SC) Editorial : Order of High Court is affirmed, CIT(TDS) v. Jai Prakash Associates Ltd (ITA No. 114 of 2015 dt. 22-8-2017)(All)((HC)

S. 201 : Deduction at source-Failure to deduct or pay-Interest-Non-convertible debentures and fixed deposit-Value less than Rs. 5,000-Not liable to deduct tax at source-Not liable to pay interest. [S. 201(1), 201(IA), Art. 136]

Singapore Airlines Ltd. v. CIT (2022) 449 ITR 203 / 329 CTR 553 / 220 DTR 1/(2023) 290 Taxman 139 (SC) KLM Royal Dutch Airlines v. CIT (2022) 449 ITR 203 / 329 CTR 553 / 220 DTR 1 (SC) British Airways PLC v. CIT(TDS) (2022) 449 ITR 203 / 329 CTR 553 / 220 DTR 1 (SC)

S. 201 : Deduction at source-Failure to deduct or pay-Assessee in default-If recipient includes amount in its income and pays taxes-Assessee cannot be held in default-Interest leviable for period between date of default in deduction and date on which recipient paid tax-Matter remanded for verification. [S. 201(1), 201(IA)]

Singapore Airlines Ltd. v. CIT (2022) 449 ITR 203 / 329 CTR 553 / 220 DTR 1 /(2023) 290 Taxman 139(SC) KLM Royal Dutch Airlines v. CIT (2022) 449 ITR 203 / 329 CTR 553 / 220 DTR 1 (SC) British Airways PLC v. CIT(TDS) (2022) 449 ITR 203 / 329 CTR 553 / 220 DTR 1 (SC) Editorial : Decision of the Delhi High Court in CIT v. Singapore Airlines Ltd(2009) 319 ITR 29 (Delhi)(HC)) affirmed. CIT v. Qatar Airways (2011) 332 ITR 253 (Bom)(HC) overruled.

S. 194H : Deduction at source-Commission or brokerage-Airline-Supplementary Commission-No distinction between direct and indirect payments-Principal-Agent relationship to be seen from terms of contract between parties-Liable to deduct tax at source-If recipient includes amount in its income and pays taxes-Assessee cannot be held in default-Interest leviable for period between date of default in deduction and date on which recipient paid tax–Different views High Courts-Reasonable cause-Levy of penalty was quashed. [201(1), 201(1A), 271C, 273B ; Contract Act, 1872, ss. 182, 215, 216]

Kuwer Fibres (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (2022) 449 ITR 174 (SC)

S. 158BC : Block assessment-Undisclosed Income-Excess stock found during search-unaccounted income admitted by director in the course of search proceedings-Tribunal deleting the addition-High court reversing the order of the Tribunal-Order of High Court affirmed [S. 158BB, Art. 132]

Ved Prakash Mittal v. UOI (2022) 449 ITR 321 (Cal.)(HC)

S. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Limitation-Order for issue of notice after six years-Barred by limitation-Order was quashed. [S. 147, 148, 148A(d), Art. 226]

Interglobe Aviation Ltd. v. ACIT (2022) 449 ITR 616 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Natural justice-Additional time was not provided for submitting the reply-Notice set aside-Matter remanded. [S.148, 148A(b), 148(d), Art. 226]

Girdhar Gopal Dalmia v. UOI (2022) 449 ITR 629 (Cal.)(HC).Editorial: Order of single judge Girdhar Gopal Dalmia v. UOI (2023) 450 ITR 143 (Cal)(HC), reversed .

S. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Failure to grant minimum seven days’ time to respond to notice-Demand not raised and final assessment order was not passed-Writ petition was dismissed. [S. 147, 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), Art, 226]

Ernst and Young U. S. LLP v. ACIT(IT) (2022) 449 ITR 425 (Delhi)(HC) Editorial: SLP of assessee dismissed, Ernst and Young U. S. LLP v. ACIT (IT)(2022) 449 ITR 3 (SC)(St)

S. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Intimation-Fresh material not necessary for reopening assessment-Order passed under section 148A(d) and notice issued under section 148 is held to be valid. [S. 143(1), 147, 148, 148A(d), Art. 226]