Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Sahil Infra Creative Pvt Ltd v. ITO (Surat) (2023) 455 ITR 11 / 294 Taxman 113 ( Guj)( HC) www.itatonline.org

S. 148A: Reassessment – Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice – Shell company – Natural justice – Reply was filed in response to notice under the old regime – Order passed without considering the objection was set aside – Directed to pass the order considering the objections filed by the assessee. [S.143(2), 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), Art , 226 ]

PCIT v. Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. (2023) 452 ITR 246 (SC) Editorial: PCIT v. Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd (ITA No. 155 of 2019 dt 8-11-2021 (Raj)(HC) is affirmed.

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Addition was deleted-Cancellation of penalty is valid. [Art. 136]

S. Palaniappan v. CIT (2023) 452 ITR 91 (Mad.)(HC) S. Manickavasagam v. ITO (2023) 452 ITR 91 (Mad.) (HC) Editorial : S. Manickavasagam v. ITO (2010) 3 ITR 304 (Chennai)(Trib.), affirmed.

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Loss on account of sale of shares-Shares were undervalued-Revision is justified. [S. 263(3)]

PCIT v. Pushp Steel and Mining Pvt. Ltd. (2023) 452 ITR 66 / 291 Taxman 586 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Share transaction-Assessing Officer applied his mind-Order of Tribunal quashing the revision order was affirmed-Appeal-High Court-Condonation of delay-Administrative reasons-The Principal Commissioner had casually termed the delay of 109 days as a delay of only of “few days” which indicated the lack of seriousness on the part of the Department in adhering to the timeline stipulated under the Act. Delay of 109 days was not condoned-Monetary limits-Includes appeal against revision order-Appeal is not maintainable [S. 260A]

PCIT v. Cartier Leaflin Pvt. Ltd. (2023) 452 ITR 242 / 291 Taxman 446 (SC) Editorial: Decision in PCIT v. Cartier Leaflin Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 1010 of 2017 dt. 15-10-2019 (Bom)(HC), affirmed.

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Operating loss-Assessing Officer applying mind and accepting operating loss-Possible view-Revision is not justified. [S. 28(i), 37(1)]

Deepak Talwar v. Dy. CIT (2023) 452 ITR 61 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 250 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Duties-Search and Seizure-Block assessment-Failure to furnish all material in Department’s possession-Direction issued to CIT(A) to furnish to assessee except documents relied upon. [S. 132, 153A, 246A, Art. 226]

Radhakrishnan Nair Madhavan Nair v. PCIT (2023) 452 ITR 104 (Ker.)(HC)

S. 246A : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Stay-Payment of 20 Per Cent. of sum assessed-Best judgement assessment-High pitched assessment-Coercive proceedings to be kept in abeyance. [S. 144, 250, Art. 226]

Sanjay Sudan v. ACIT (2023) 452 ITR 107 / 331 CTR 797 / 224 DTR 9/ 292 Taxman 138 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 205 : Deduction at source-Bar against direct demand-Refund-Department cannot demand tax from assessee and set off demand against refund of any other assessment year. [S. 194, 237]

Construction Engineers v. UOI (2023) 452 ITR 33 / 331 CTR 788/ 223 DTR 435 (J&K&L)(HC)

S. 200 : Deduction at source-Duty of person deducting tax-Intimation of demand-Not responding to notice-Garnishee notice to bank-Alternative remedy-Writ is not maintainable. [S. 201(IA), 221, 226(3), 246A, Art. 226]

Tirupati Buildings and Offices Pvt. Ltd. v. PCIT (2023) 452 ITR 282 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 153D : Assessment-Search-Sanction-Sanction-Alternative remedy-Writ was dismissed against the order of CIT(A). [S. 253, Art. 226]