Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Nilkanth Stone Industries v. PCIT (2021) 189 ITD 718 (Surat) (Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Loans and advances-Order was passed due verification-Revision was held to be not valid. [S. 69A]

Kaushikbhai P. Patel v. PCIT (2021) 88 ITR 20 (SN) (Ahd.)(Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-No expenditure claimed-Added to work in progress-No prejudice to revenue-Revision was held to be not valid. [S. 145]

Galaxy Surfactants Ltd. v. ACIT (2021) 190 ITD 741 / 88 ITR 39 (SN) / 211 TTJ 858 / 201 DTR 381 (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Draft assessment order was prepared and served-It is not open to the Assessing Officer to revisit the draft assessment order-Revision is held to be valid. [S. 92C, 144C(3)]

Jitender Kumar Gupta (HUF) v. ACIT (2021) 189 ITD 714 (Hyd.) (Trib.)

S. 148 : Reassessment-Notice-Information from Investigation wing-Bogus long term and Short term capital gains-Reasons for reopening was not supplied-Directed to supply reasons for reopening-Directed to pass in accordance with law-Matter remanded. [S. 69B, 147]

Satish Kumar Khandelwal v. ITO (2021) 189 ITD 118 / 213 TTJ 584/ 206 DTR 289 (Jaipur)(Trib.)

S. 147 : Reassessment-With in four years-Recorded reasons-Return filed regularly-Recorded reasons without application of mind-Reassessment was quashed. [S. 139, 148]

Samanthapudi Lavanya (Smt.) v. ACIT (2021) 189 ITD 401 (Vishakha)(Trib.)

S. 147 : Reassessment-Search and seizure-Search assessment was required to be made under section 153A or 153C-Reassessment was quashed-Reassessment without communication of reasons recorded when request was made-Reassessment is bad in law-Delay of 492 days in filing of appeal due to mistake of accountant was condoned. [S. 132(4), 148, 153A, 153C, 254(1)]

Silver Bella Holdings Ltd. v. ACIT(IT) (2021) 189 ITD 678 (Delhi) (Trib.)

S. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel-No variation in income-Draft assessment order was not warranted. [S. 92C, 143 (3)]

Shri Lakshmanan v. ITO (2021) 189 ITD 499 (Chennai)(Trib.)

S. 144 : Best judgment assessment-Civil construction-Rejection of books of account-Estimation of 5% of net profit on gross receipts-Tribunal estimated at 3%. [S. 145(3)]

Cosmat Traders (P.) Ltd. v. ITO (2021) 189 ITD 504 (Kol.)(Trib.)

S. 144 : Best judgment assessment-Change of jurisdiction-Fresh notice was not issued-Assessment is held to be bad in law. [S. 120, 143(2)]

ITO v. Star Consortium (2021) 189 ITD 105 (Kol.)(Trib.)

S. 143(3) : Assessment-Cash credits-Mismatch of tax deducted at source-Turnover-Difference in 26AS and actual turnover-Addition cannot be made only on the basis of information as per form No. 26AS. [S. 68]