Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Humuza Consultants v. PCIT 2022 (Mum( Trib) www.itatonline .org

S. 263: Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue – AO examined the issue – PCIT cannot demonstrate the error or lack of enquiry – Cannot be deemed to be erroneous – S. 56 (2)(viia) not applicable to gifting of shares of a listed company. [ S. 56(2)(viia) ]

Murli Industries Limited v. ACIT (Nag -Bench ) ( 2022) 441 ITR 8 / 209 DTR 337/ 324 CTR 355 (Bom)(HC) www.itatonline .org .

S. 148: Reassessment – Issuance of notice of reassessment – Resolution personal -Provisions of this Code to override other laws – For period prior to approval of resolution plan under the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (‘IBC’) – Once the public announcement is made under the IBC by the Resolution Professional calling upon all concerned, including the statutory bodies, to raise claim, it would be expected from all the stakeholders to diligently raise their claim- Not maintainable against the Corporate Debtor- Notice issue was quashed (S. 147, The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code , 2016 , S. 7, 30(2), 238, Art , 226 )

Janata Sahakari Bank Ltd. v. Tax Recovery Officer (2021) 204 DTR 401 / 322 CTR 162 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 281 : Certain transfers to be void-Transfer to defraud revenue-Mortgages-Pendency of recovery proceedings-Transaction or transfer became void-Doctrine of the priority of Crown debts-Disputed factors cannot be adjudicated by the High court in a writ petition. [S. 222, Schedule II Rule. 11, Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1983, S. 31B, Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, S. 26E, Art. 226, 265, 268A]

Haren Textiles (P.) Ltd. v. PCIT (2021) 206 DTR 465 / 323 CTR 14 / 284 Taxman 58 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 270AA : Immunity from imposition of penalty, etc-Application accepted the assessee cannot file an appeal or revision application-Application is rejected there is no bar-Matter remanded. [S. 246A, 264, 270AA(4), Art. 226 ]

Narayana Chetty Roja v. PCIT (2021) 206 DTR 421 (AP)(HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-COVID-19-Violation of principle of natural justice-Order passed without giving an opportunity of hearing was set aside-Matter remanded. [Art. 226]

Gupta Trademart (P) Ltd. v. Dy.CIT (2021) 439 ITR 407/205 DTR 401 / 322 CTR 477 / .( 2022] 285 Taxman 632 (Raj.) (HC) Rajendra Gupta v. Dy.CIT (2021) 439 ITR 4007/ 205 DTR 401 / 322 CTR 477// .( 2022] 285 Taxman 632 (Raj.) (HC)

S. 245D : Settlement Commission-Application-Full and true disclosure-Opportunity of being heard-Settlement Commission directed to get Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) report-Order was passed without giving an opportunity of hearing and without waiting for FSL report-Order of Settlement Commission was set aside-Directed to pass the order after getting FSL report and an opportunity of hearing. [S. 245C, 245D(4), Art. 226]

P. Suman (Smt.) v. CIT (2021) 205 DTR 385 / 322 CTR 655 / 130 taxmann.com 249/( 2022) 440 ITR 214 /285 Taxman 587 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 245D : Settlement Commission-Procedure-Application-Directed to file additional income-Entitle to immunity from penalty and prosecution. [S. 153CA, 245C, 245D(4), Art. 226]

Indu Srivastava v. ITSC (2021) 206 DTR 265 / 323 CTR 174 /( 2022) 440 ITR 280 / 286 Taxman 52 (All.)(HC)

S. 245C : Settlement Commission-Settlement of cases-Conditions-Manner of acquiring the income had been explained-Additional income was disclosed-Order of settlement Commission rejection of application was set aside-Directed the Interim board to decide the matter in accordance with law. [S. 56(2)(vii), 132(4A), 245D, 292C, Art. 226]

Jet Privilege (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2021) 205 DTR 145 / 322 CTR 684 / 131 taxmann.com 119 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 245 : Refund-Set off of refunds against tax remaining payable-Stay of demand-Adjustment of refund without giving an intimation in writing is held to be bad in law. [Art. 226]

Eko India Financial Services (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2021) 205 DTR 113 / 322 CTR 201 / 283 Taxman 584 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 245 : Refund-Set off of refunds against tax remaining payable-Adjustment refunds in excess of 20% of outstanding is contrary to instruction No 1914 of 21-3-1996-Assessing Officer was directed to refund amount adjusted in excess of 20 per cent of disputed demand. [S. 220, Art. 226]