Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


ABU Dhabi Investment Authority v. AAR (2021) 439 ITR 437 / 323 CTR 369 / 207 DTR 209/ ( 2022) 284 Taxman 492 (Bom) (HC) Equity Trust (Jersey) Ltd. v. AAR (2021) 439 ITR 437 / 323 CTR 369 / 207 DTR 209 (Bom) (HC) Editorial : Ruling in Copal Partners Ltd , In re ( 2021 ) 431 ITR 379 ( AAR ) overruled .Editorial : Notice issued in SLP filed by Revenue , Dy. CIT (IT) v. Equity Trust (Jersey) Ltd. (2022) 288 Taxman 636 (SC)

S. 9(1)(i): Income deemed to accrue or arise in India – Representative assessee — Trustee – Business connection -British Virgin Islands by company registered in Jersey- Trust in Jercy becoming sole beneficiary – Power to make investment in in India – Foreign Trustees recognised by Indian Income-Tax Law — Arrangement for purposes of commercial expediency – Income that accrued to the trust would not be chargeable to tax in India either by virtue of application of section 61 read with section 63 or section 161 of the Act conjointly with the provisions of article 24 of the DTAA. Income accruing – Ruling of AAR was quashed – DTAA-India -UAE [ S. 5(2), 10(23FB) 61, 62, 63 , 90, 160 , 161, 245-0, Indian Trusts Act, 1882, S. 1,3 , Art , 4 (2)(d), 24 ]

Peninsula Land Ltd v .ACIT ( 2021 ) 439 ITR 582/ (2022) 134 taxmann.com 33 ( Bom ) (HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment – After the expiry of four years – Subsequent search and Seizure of another party – Loan activity not established – Recorded reasons must indicate the manner in which the Assessing Officer has come to the conclusion that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment – Reason recorded cannot be substituted – Reassessment Notice was quashed .[S. 68 , 132, 133A, 148 , 153A, Art , 226 ]

Stride Multimedia Pvt Ltd v. ACIT ( 2021) 439 ITR 141 /(2022) 284 Taxman 684 ( Bom)(HC)

Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act , 2020 .

S. 2(1)(a)(i): Person – Pendency of appeal – Application for condonation of delay was pending before CIT(A)- Notice of hearing was issued – Rejection of application on the ground that the appeal was not admitted was held to be not justified -Order of rejection set aside [S. 2(1)(a) (n), ITAct, S. 246A, 250 Art , 226 ]

Lokhanwala Construction Industries v .Dy .CIT ( Bom)(HC) www.itatonline .org

S. 147: Reassessment – After the expiry of four years – Builder stock in trade- Notional income – Reassessment notice on the basis of Judgement of Delhi High Court in Ansal Housing Finance and Leasing Company Ltd ( 2013 ) 354 ITR 180 (Delhi)(HC) to assessee the income under section 23 of the Act was quashed [ S. 22, 23(5) , 148 , Art , 226 ]

Ambika Iron and Steel Pvt. Ltd v. PCIT( 2022) 326 CTR 871 /213 DTR 446 /(2023)452 ITR 285 (Orissa ) (HC) www.itatonline/org

S. 151 : Reassessment – Sanction for issue of notice – Issuance of Notice requires the sanction of PCIT where the Notice is issued after 4 years – Relaxation Act not a bar for appropriate sanction- Reassessment notice is held to be bad in law . [ S. 147, 148 , Art , 226 ]

Sudesh Taneja v. ITO (Raj)(HC) www.itatonline.org/Dharmendra Gupta (HUF ) v.ITO (2022) 285 Taxman 484( Raj)(HC/Kandoi Metal Powders Manufacturing Company (P.) Ltd v.ACIT (2022) 285 Taxman 500 ( Raj)(HC )

S. 148: Reassessment – Notice-Constitutional validity – The delegation authorized being only for the purpose of enlarging limitation under a valid law, such delegation could not be exercised to resurrect the provision of law that stood omitted from the statute book by virtue of its substitution made by the Finance Act, 2021, w.e.f. 01.04.2021 – Reassessment notices issued under section 148 of the Act are quashed-It is left open to the assessing authority to initiate – re-assessment proceedings in accordance with the provisions of the Act, as amended by the Finance Act, 2021 after making due compliance as required under the law. [S. 147, 148A, 149, 151, 151A, 153, 292 Relaxation of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 (TOLA), S. 3(1) of the Act 38 of 2020, Art. 226]

Anita Sunil Mahajan (Smt.) v. ACIT (2021) 191 ITD 272 / 89 ITR 52 (SN) / 213 TTJ 370 / 205 DTR 25 (Pune)(Trib.)

S. 271AA : Penalty-Failure to keep and maintain books of accounts-Documents-Specified domestic transactions (SDTs)-2 per cent of value of SDTs Exceeded qualifying amount of Rs. 5 crores-Transaction with relative was only to Rs. 1.80 lalks-Term relative as given in section 2(41), which will prevail for understanding connotation of term relative under section 40A(2)(b) over one given in Explanation to section 56(2)(v) of the Act-Levy of penalty was held to be not justified. [S. 2(41), 40A(2)(b), 56(2(v),92BA, 92D, 92E]

3M India Ltd. v. CIT (2021) 191 ITD 480 / 90 ITR 57 (SN) (Bang.)(Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Commissioner has not pointed out any error for the relevant assessment year-Revision is held to be not valid. [S.40(a)(1), 92CA]

DCIT v. Saroj Kumar Poddar (2021) 191 ITD 660 / 90 ITR 223/ 203 DTR 81 (Kol.)(Trib.)

S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal-Powers-Pandemic-Request for an adjournment of six months was rejected-Directed to fix the hearing on 24-5-2021.

DCIT v. Barclays Global Services Centre (P.) Ltd. (2021) 191 ITD 84 / 89 ITR 40 (SN) (Pune)(Trib.)

S. 251 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Powers-Amounts not deductible-Deduction at source-Non-resident-Reimbursement of expenses- Cost of allocation-Not passed reasoned order-Matter remanded to CIT(A). [S. 9(1)(vii), 40(a)(i), 195, 250, 254(1)]