Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


ITO v. Kayathwal Estate P. Ltd. (2022) 442 ITR 507 / 213 DTR 209 / 326 CTR 494 / 287 Taxman 385 (SC) Editorial : Decision in Kayathwal Estate P. Ltd v. ITO (2022) 442 ITR 498 (Guj.)(HC) is affirmed.

S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Order passed after pursuing details furnished-Reassessment notice is not valid. [S. 143(3), 148]

Shriram Chits and Investments (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2013) 85 DTR 144/ 85 Taman 356 / (2022) 442 ITR 54 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 145 : Method of accounting-Business expenditure-Advertisement expenditure-Allowable as revenue expenditure-Method of accounting-v Proportionate completion method-Profits Accounted for chit discount on completed contract method-Revenue neutral-Method of accounting justified. [S. 37(1), Chit Funds Act, 1982, 21(1(b)]

Volex Interconnect (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT (2022) 442 ITR 425 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel-Assessment Proceedings on remand-Procedure must be followed-Order is held to be not valid. [S. 92CA(4)]

Pradip Kumar Saha v. UOI (2022) 442 ITR 231 / 210 DTR 190 / 325 CTR 110 (Cal.)(HC)

S. 144B : Faceless Assessment-Violation of Principles of natural justice-Order set aside-Matter remanded. [S. 143(3), 156, Art, 226]

Multiplier Brand Solutions Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO (2022) 442 ITR 202 (Bom.)(HC).Editorial: Add. CIT v. Multiplier Brand Solutions Pvt. Ltd. (2023)453 ITR 233 (SC) , order of High Court is modified and matter remanded to the Assessing Officer .

S. 144B : Faceless Assessment-Final order passed without issuing draft assessment order-Matter remanded. [S. 144B(1)(xvib), 156, Art. 226]

Golden Tobacco Ltd. v. NFACE (2022) 442 ITR 204 / 284 Taxman 292 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 144B : Faceless Assessment-Final order passed without issuing draft assessment order-Assessment order and subsequent demand notice is set aside. [S. 143(3), 144B(vii), 156, Art. 226]

Estra Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. v. NFACA (2022) 442 ITR 112 (Mad.) (HC)

S. 144B : Faceless Assessment-Violation of principle of natural justice-Adequate opportunity of hearing not given-Order of assessment is not valid-Order is set aside. [Art. 226]

Bharat Aluminium Co. Ltd. v. UOI (2022)442 ITR 101 / 285 Taxman 447 / 211 DTR 10 / 325 CTR 252 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 144B : Faceless Assessment-Opportunity of personal hearing not granted and reply of assessee is not considered-Violation of principle of natural justice-The word may in section 144B(7)(viii) should be read as must or shall and requirement of giving an assessee a reasonable opportunity of personal hearing is mandatory-Matter remanded. [S. 142(1) 143(3 156, Art. 226]

Kaushik Kumar Gupta v. ITO (2022) 442 ITR 449 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 144 : Best judgment assessment-Names struck off from Register of Companies-Grant of time to respondents to file counter-Affidavits-Assessment order stayed. [S. 147, Art. 226]

Mando Automotive India Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy.CIT (NO. 2) (2022) 442 ITR 443 / 214 DTR 121/ 327 CTR 644Mad.)(HC) Editorial : Mando Automotive India Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy.CIT (NO. 1) (2022)442 ITR 433/ 214 DTR 127 / 327 CTR 651/ 138 taxmann.com 340 (Mad) (HC) order of single judge is affirmed with deleting observations on merits.

S. 143(3) : Assessment-Permanent account number-Draft assessment order-Amalgamation-Observation made by single judge is vacated-Assessee relegated to statutory remedy of appeal to be decided on merits. [S. 139A(5), 144C, Art. 226]