Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Swamina International Pvt. Ltd. v. ITSC (2022) 442 ITR 343 / 286 Taxman 26/ 214 DTR 175 / 327 CTR 684(Cal.)(HC)

S. 245D : Settlement Commission-Violation of principle of natural justice-No opportunity is given to raise objections to order-Order of Settlement Commission is set a-side. [S. 245C, 245D(3), 245D(4), Art. 226]

Ramesth Constructions Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2022) 442 ITR 181 / 209 DTR 462 / 324 CTR 337 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 245 : Refund-Set off of refunds against tax remaining payable–Opportunity of hearing not provided before adjustment-Entitled to refund of adjustments in excess of 20 Per Cent. [S. 156, 220, 227, Art. 226]

Rohan Developers Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO(IT). (2022) 442 ITR 404 / 211 DTR 164 / 325 CTR 395 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 244A : Refund-Interest on refunds-Deduction of tax at source-Excess deduction-Interest payable to deductor-Interest to be calculated from payment of tax. [S. 195(2)]

R. Pannerselvam v. PCIT (2022) 442 ITR 376 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 237 : Refunds-Reassessment-Failure to file returns within time-Notice of reassessment must be issued-Procedure laid down in Income-Tax Act must be followed by Income-Tax Authorities-Directed to examine the claim of refund within a period of three months. [S. 119, 147, 148, Art. 226]

Aditi Infrabuild and Services Ltd. v. ACIT (2022) 442 ITR 50 (Delhi) (HC)

S. 220 : Collection and recovery-Assessee deemed in default-Adjustment of refund in excess of 20 Per Cent of tax in dispute-Held to be not valid-Directed to refund adjustment made in excess of 20 per cent-Stay granted till disposal of appeal by CIT(A). [S. 156, 220(6), 245, Art. 226]

State Bank of India v. ACIT (TDS) (2022) 442 ITR 363 (Karn.)(HC)

S. 192 : Deduction at source-Salary-Failure to deduct ta at source-Plea of bona fide belief based on circular issued by employer for its own use-No clarification by Income-Tax Authorities-Levy of interest is valid. [S. 10(5), 133A, 201(1), 201(1A), R. 2B]

Oracle Financial Services Software Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2022) 286 Taxman 469 //(2023)452 ITR 272 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment-With in four years-All relevant material in respect of employee costs reimbursed to overseas subsidiaries furnished in the course of original assessment proceedings-Change of opinion-Reassessment notice is not valid. [S. 92CA, 148, Art. 226]

ITO v. Kayathwal Estate P. Ltd. (2022) 442 ITR 507 / 213 DTR 209 / 326 CTR 494 / 287 Taxman 385 (SC) Editorial : Decision in Kayathwal Estate P. Ltd v. ITO (2022) 442 ITR 498 (Guj.)(HC) is affirmed.

S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Order passed after pursuing details furnished-Reassessment notice is not valid. [S. 143(3), 148]

Shriram Chits and Investments (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2013) 85 DTR 144/ 85 Taman 356 / (2022) 442 ITR 54 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 145 : Method of accounting-Business expenditure-Advertisement expenditure-Allowable as revenue expenditure-Method of accounting-v Proportionate completion method-Profits Accounted for chit discount on completed contract method-Revenue neutral-Method of accounting justified. [S. 37(1), Chit Funds Act, 1982, 21(1(b)]

Volex Interconnect (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT (2022) 442 ITR 425 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel-Assessment Proceedings on remand-Procedure must be followed-Order is held to be not valid. [S. 92CA(4)]