Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Shree Naurang Godavari Entertainment Ltd. v. ACIT (2022) 194 ITD 431 / 216 TTJ 853/ 212 DTR 129 (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 250 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Procedure-Ex parte order-Order id set aside.

ITO v. Thyrocare Technologies Ltd. (2022) 216 TTJ 513/ 213 DTR 233 (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 201 : Deduction at source-Failure to deduct or pay-Pathological testing services-Commission or discount to sample collection centres-No obligation to deduct tax at source-Cannot be treated as assessee in default. [S. 194H]

P. S. Jagdish v. Dy. CIT (2022) 216 TTJ 500 / 211 DTR 153 (Chennai)(Trib.)/Shekar P. S. v. Dy. CIT (2022) 216 TTJ 500 / 211 DTR 153 (Chennai)(Trib)

S. 154 : Rectification of mistake-The date of the original order is the commencing point of limitation, irrelevant to the subsequent rectification or subsequent application. Hence, the order passed beyond 31.03.2015 is barred by limitation. [S. 143(1), 154(7)]

Neelachal Carbo Metalicks (P) Ltd. v. ACIT (2022) 216 TTJ 201/ 211 DTR 76 (Cuttack)(Trib.)

S. 153D : Assessment-Search-Approval-Order passed by AO without due approval from supervisory authority-Order was quashed. [S. 142(1), 153A]

ACIT v. Lepro Herbals (P.) Ltd. (2022) 94 ITR 225 / 216 TTJ 782 / 215 DTR 233 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 153A : Assessment-Search or requisition-Hard disc-Undisclosed income-No corroborative evidence such as bogus purchase bills or bogus expenses and unexplained investment found during search-Addition is held to be not valid. [S. 132, 145(2)]

ACIT v. B.G. Channappa (2022) 64 CCH 56 / 216 TTJ 963 / 214 DTR 74 (Bang.)(Trib.)

S. 153A : Assessment-Search or requisition-Unexplained expenditure-Purchase of land-Addition was held to be justified. [S. 132]

Clarion Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT (2022) 216 TTJ 23 (UO) (Pune) (Trib.)

S. 153 : Assessment-Reassessment-Limitation-Pre-dated re-assessment order incorporating directions of Add’l CIT under section 144A passed before the date on the directions under section 144A as well as consequential first appellant proceedings set aside. [S. 144A]

Alankar Commodeal (P.) Ltd. v. ITO (2022) 216 TTJ 445 / 213 DTR 161 (Kol.)(Trib.)

S. 151 : Reassessment-Sanction for issue of notice-Without application of mind-Reassessment is quashed. [S. 147(b), 148]

Kashmir Singh v. ITO (2022) 216 TTJ 523 / 211 DTR 217 (Amritsar)(Trib.)

S. 151 : Reassessment-Sanction for issue of notice-two separate notices-Same assessment year-No application of mind-Reassessment was quashed. [S. 147, 148]

Harsh Vardhan v. CIT (2022) 64 CCH 367 / (2022) 216 TTJ 923 / 212 DTR 137 (Amritsar)(Trib.)

S. 148 : Reassessment-Notice-Service of notice by affixture-Service of notice on consultant-Participated in the proceedings-Objection was raised for the first time before ITAT-For the limited purposes to verify the factual position as to whether the objections raised by the assessee through the letters referred or not, the ITAT restored the matter to the file of the AO for the limitation purpose of making necessary verifications. [S. 147, 254(1), 282, 292BB, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Order V-Rule 17 and Rule 19]