Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Amrish Manoj Dhupalia v. DCIT ( Mum)( Trib) www.itatonline .org Bhavya Manoj Dhupalia ( Ms) v. DCIT ( Mum)( Trib) www.itatonline .org Mohan Manoj Dhupalia v. DCIT ( Mum)( Trib) www.itatonline .org

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty – Concealment -Additional legal ground is admitted -Not specifying the charge – Levy of penalty is not valid – Substantial question of law is admitted before High Court – Penalty cannot be levied- The decision in Veena Estate P.Ltd v. CIT( 2024) 464 ITR 483 ( Bom)( HC) is distinguished . [ S. 68, 69, 260A, 274 ]

Mukesh Trends Lifestyle Limited v. DCIT (Ahd)(Trib)(UR)

S. 32: Depreciation – Car registered in name of director – Funds utilized of the company – Depreciation is allowable to the company.

Pawan International v. ITO (Chd)(Trib) (UR)

S. 272A : Penalty – Failure to answer questions – Sign statements – Furnish information – Substantial compliance – Levy of penalty is not justified. [S. 143(3), 272A(1)(d)]

ITO v. Saraswati Wire And Cable Industries (Mum)( Trib)(UR)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty – Concealment – Bogus purchases – Estimated addition – Levy of penalty is not valid.[S.69A]

Venerable Advertising P. Ltd. v. PCIT [2024] 109 ITR 81 (SN.) (Kol) (Trib) Editorial: Amritrashi Infra (P) Ltd. v. PR. CIT in ITA No 838/Kol/2019; Assessment Year 2012-13; order dt. 12/08/2020; Narayan Tatu Rane v. ITO [2016] 70 taxmann.com 227 (Mum.) (Trib.) Followed.

S. 263: Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue – Assessment order passed after making necessary inquiries – Held, revision proceedings cannot be initiated simply because PCIT was of the opinion that further inquiries should have been made on the issue.[ S.143(3) ]

Pramod Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO (Raipur)(Trib) (UR)

S. 251 : Appeal – Commissioner (Appeals) – Powers – Appeal cannot be dismissed on account of non-prosecution- Order is set aside and directed to decide on merits. [S. 246A, 251(2)]

Parinee Housing Pvt. Ltd v. Dy. CIT (Mum)(Trib)(UR)

S. 151 : Reassessment – Sanction for issue of notice – Beyond three years – Specified Authority – Sanction by Principal Commissioner of Income Tax- Reassessment notice and order is bad in law.[S.148, 148A(b), 148A(d), 151(ii)]

Sakina Ahmedali Kantavala v. ITO [2024] 163 taxmann.com 115 (Ahd)(Trib)

S. 69A : Unexplained moneys – Demonetization – Not taxable as undisclosed income – Best judgement assessment – Order under section 144 is not valid.[S. 115BBE, 144]

Hemant Samarataji Lohar v. CIT(A) [2024] 163 taxmann.com 292 (SMC) (Mum)(Trib)

S. 69A: Unexplained moneys – Search – Cash seized during search – Explained the source of cash – Addition is deleted. [S. 132]

DCIT v. Jaymala Infrastructure P. Ltd. (Mum) (Trib) (UR)

S. 68: Cash credits – Share capital – Need not prove source of the source – Order of CIT(A) deleting the addition is affirmed. [S. 131, 133(6)]