Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Milestone Brandcom Pvt. Ltd. v NFAC (2022) 441 ITR 470 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 144B : Faceless Assessment-Draft assessment order and notice -Reply not considered-Request for personal hearing not considered -Non-application of mind by Assessing Officer- Order and consequential demand was set aside-Matter Remanded-Strictures-Assessing Officer was directed to pay Rs. 10,000 as donation from his personal account to P.M. Care Fund. [S. 156, 270, Art. 226]

Golden Tobacco Ltd. v. NFAC (2022) 442 ITR 204/284 Taxman 292 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 144B : Faceless Assessment-Natural Justice-Order passed without issuing show cause notice and draft assessment order-Order was quashed and set aside. [S. 143(3), 144B(1)(xvi), Art. 226]

Abacus Real Estate (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2022) 284 Taxman 654 (Bom.)(HC) Editorial ;Dy. CIT v. Abacus Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. (2023)453 ITR 224 (SC),decision of the Bombay High Court is modified and matter remanded .

S. 144B : Faceless Assessment-Natural justice-No show cause notice was issued-Order passed without following mandatory procedure-Order was quashed. [Art. 226]

PCIT v. 3I India Ltd. (2022) 445 ITR 504284 Taxman 487 (Bom.)(HC).Editorial : SLP of Revenue dismissed , PCIT v. 3I India Ltd(2022) 289 Taxman 295 ( SC)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Adjustments-Comparable-Tribunal correctly applied the principle and decided on facts-No question of law Stricture-Court directed that the Commissioner of Income-tax and CIT (Judicial) would well to review all appeals filed and with draw the same if it is on facts and settled law. The Court also directed the Counsel of Revenue to serve a copy of this order on the law Secretary (Government of India), Central Board of Direct Taxes, Principal Chief Commissioner of Income tax (Maharashtra) and CIT (Judicial) for necessary action. [S.92CA, 260A]

PCIT v. Goldline Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. (2022) 441 ITR 543 / 210 CTR 57 / 324 CTR 640 / 286 Taxman 345 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Expenses in providing free gifts Facilities to Medical Practitioners-Allowable as deduction-Expenses prohibited by law-Oppressive circulars would have prospective application.

PCIT v. Universal Music India Pvt. Ltd. (Bom)(HC) www.itatonline .org Editorial: CIT v. Amitabh Bacchan ( 2016) 384 ITR 200/ (69) taxmann.com 170 (SC) distinguished.

S. 263: Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue – Payment to specified persons – Revision proceedings cannot travel beyond the reasons given in show cause notice- 0rder of Tribunal is affirmed [ S. 40A(2)(b ) ]

Small Industries Development Bank of India v. CBDT (2022) 441 ITR 80/ 285 Taxman 113// 209 DTR 171/ 324 CTR 317 (Bom) (HC)

Interpretation of taxing statutes – Non obstante clause – Additional tax on distributed profits [ S. 2(22)(a), 115-O, Small Industries Development Bank of India Act, 1989, S. 29(2), 50 ]

Svitzer Hazira ( P) Ltd v. ACIT ( 2022)441 ITR 19/ 285 Taxman 393/ 211 DTR 387 / 326 CTR 96( Bom)( HC)

S. 151 : Reassessment – Sanction for issue of notice -No prior sanction was granted before issue of notice – Notice was quashed [ S. 147, 148 , Art, 226 ]

PCIT v. Yes Bank Ltd ( 2022) 285 Taxman 434 ( Bom)( HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment – Bad debts- Audit objection- Provision for standard asset / advances under general loan loss provision excluding provision for NPA and claiming deduction – Order of Tribunal quashing the reassessment was affirmed . [ S. 35D, 36(1)viia), 148, 260A]

Sanghvi Woods Ltd. v. ACIT (2022) 285 Taxman 252/ 209 DTR 233/ 324 CTR 332 (Bom) (HC )

S. 147 : Reassessment – Block assessment – Deduction disallowed in the block assessment order – Reassessment notice is bad in law [ S.80HHA, 80I, 80IA, 132, 143(3), 148, 158BA, 158BC , Art, 226 ]