Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Gemstar Construction (P.) Ltd. v UOI (2022) 285 Taxman 457 (Bom) (HC)

S. 147: Re assessment – Change of opinion – Housing project – Full details of residential unit was furnished in the course of assessment proceedings – Re assessment is held to be bad in law . [ S.80IB(10), 148 Art , 226 ]

Reynolds Shirting Ltd. v. ACIT (2022)285 Taxman 554 (Bom) (HC)

S.147: Reassessment – After the expiry of four years – Cash credits – Information received from Director (Investigation ) –Bogus suspicious transaction – Fishing enquiry – Reassessment notice is quashed . [ S. 68, 148 , Art , 226 ]

Reuters India (P.) Ltd. v. Dy.CIT (2022 ) 285 taxman 557 (Bom)( HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment – After the expiry of four years – Certificate was issued for nil TDS – Reassessment notice on the ground that misrepresentation of facts – Agreement was made available when the certificate was issued – Reassessment is held to be not justified .[ S. 148 , 197, Art , 226 ]

Patel Engineering Ltd. v . Dy. CIT (2022)446 ITR 728 / 285 Taxman 655 / 210 DTR 185 (Bom) (HC)

S.147: Reassessment – After the expiry of four years – Sub contract and sub -contract – During assessment proceedings all details are furnished – survey – Reasons cannot be improved or supplemented Re assessment notice is not valid – Re assessment notice is not valid .[ S. 133A, 148 , Art , 226 ]

CIT v. SBI Life Insurance Company Ltd (2022) 444 ITR 639/ 285 Taxman 705 (Bom)(HC)

S.147: Reassessment – After the expiry of four years – Life Insurance company – Actuarial report- No failure to disclose material facts – Reassessment is not justified [ S.44, 57 , 148, Art , 226 ]

PCIT v. Indofil Industries Ltd. (2022)285 Taxman 476 / 213 DTR 213/ 327 CTR 603 (Bom)(HC)

S. 40(a)(ia): Amounts not deductible – Deduction at source – Commission paid to Chairman and manging director – Part of salary provision of section 192 is applicable and not section 194H- TDS is deductible at the time of payment and not when the provision was made – No disallowance can be made . [ S. 192 , 194H , Form No 16 ]

PCIT v. Mahindra Engineering and Chemical Products Ltd (2022)285 Taxman 699 / 212 DTR 378(Bom)(HC)

S. 36(1)(vii) :Bad debt -Deposit made with sister concern –Capital ,loss – Interest income assessed as business income – Waiver of principal amount and interest accrued – Allowable as bad debt . [ S. 28(i), 36(2)(i)]

Gear Training and Research Foundation. v. CIT (E) ( 2021) 92 ITR 28 ( SN) / (2022) 192 ITD 655 / 216 TTJ 456 / 213 DTR 326(Jaipur) (Trib.)

S. 12AA : Procedure for registration –Trust or institution- Object to develop training and research centre to facilitate skill development to entire chain of work force engaged at various levels in garment and textile industry- Entitle for registration -Delay condoned [ S. 2(15), 11, 253 , Companies Act , 2013 , S. 8 ]

UOI v. Ashsih Agarwal (2022) 444 ITR 1/ 213 DTR 217/ 326 CTR 473/ 286 Taxman 183 (SC) www.itatonline .org.Editorial : Decisions of the Allahabad , Calcutta , Rajasthan , Delhi, Chattisgarh , Bombay and Madras High Court modified. Ashok Kumar Agarwal v .UOI ( 2021) 439 ITRR 1 ( All)(HC), Bagaria Properties and Investment Pvt Ltd v .UOI (2021) 441 ITR 359 ( Cal)(HC) Manoj Jain v .UOI (2021) 441 ITR 359 ( Cal )(HC) , Manoj Jain v. UOI ( 2021) 441 ITR 418 ( Cal)(HC), BRIP Infra Pvt Ltd v.ITO ( 2022)440 ITR 300 ( Raj)(HC), Sudesh Taneja v .ITO ( 2022) 442 ITR 289 ( Raj)(HC), Mon Mohan Kholi v .ACIT ( 2022) 441 ITR 207 ( Delhi)(HC), Palak Khatuja v .UOI( 2021) 438 ITR 622 ( Chhhatishgarh )(HC), Tata Comminications Transformation Service Ltd v .ACIT ( 2022)) 443 ITR 49 ( Bom)(HC), Vellore Institute of Technology v .CBDT ( 2022) 442 ITR 233 ( Mad)(HC) Editorial : Decisions of the Allahabad , Calcutta , Rajasthan , Delhi, Chattisgarh , Bombay and Madras High Court modified. Ashok Kumar Agarwal v .UOI ( 2021) 439 ITRR 1 ( All)(HC), Bagaria Properties and Investment Pvt Ltd v .UOI (2021) 441 ITR 359 ( Cal)(HC) Manoj Jain v .UOI (2021) 441 ITR 359 ( Cal )(HC) , Manoj Jain v. UOI ( 2021) 441 ITR 418 ( Cal)(HC), BRIP Infra Pvt Ltd v.ITO ( 2022)440 ITR 300 ( Raj)(HC), Sudesh Taneja v .ITO ( 2022) 442 ITR 289 ( Raj)(HC), Mon Mohan Kholi v .ACIT ( 2022) 441 ITR 207 ( Delhi)(HC), Palak Khatuja v .UOI( 2021) 438 ITR 622 ( Chhhatishgarh )(HC), Tata Comminications Transformation Service Ltd v .ACIT ( 2022)) 443 ITR 49 ( Bom)(HC), Vellore Institute of Technology v .CBDT ( 2022) 442 ITR 233 ( Mad)(HC)

S. 148: Reassessment – Notice – Section 148 notices issued by the Assessing Officers shall be deemed to have been issued under Section 148A as substituted by the Finance Act, 2021 and to be treated as show¬ cause notices in terms of Section 148A(b) of the Act -The Assessing Officers shall, within 30 days from 04-05-2022, provide the information and material relied upon so that the assessees can reply to the notices within two weeks thereafter. Decision to apply to all such notices quashed by High Courts throughout Country [ S. 148A(b), 149,Art , 142 ]

G. Victor Devasahayam v. ACIT (2022) 441 ITR 131 / 284 Taxman 531 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 276C : Offences and prosecutions-Evasion of tax-Alteration of charges based on additional witness-Sanction already obtained-New or fresh sanction is not required-Disputed question of fact of non-issuance of notice by Tax Recovery Officer can be confronted in Trial framing additional charge based on additional evidence-Order passed by Special Sessions Judge, in allowing application was affirmed.[S. 276(1),276C(2), 279(1) ; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973,S.216(5)]