S. 250 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Procedure-Principle of natural justice-Dismissal of appeal without granting right to be heard-Matter remanded [S. 154]
Parminder Singh Grewal. v. ITO (2022) 192 ITD 592 (SMC) (Chd.)(Trib.)S. 250 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Procedure-Principle of natural justice-Dismissal of appeal without granting right to be heard-Matter remanded [S. 154]
Parminder Singh Grewal. v. ITO (2022) 192 ITD 592 (SMC) (Chd.)(Trib.)S. 250 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Procedure-Failure to attend on specified date-Failure to consider additional evidence-Order was set aside and directed to pass speaking order. [S. 251]
Rajesh Kumar Singhal v. ITO (2022) 192 ITD 133 (Delhi)(Trib.)S. 244A : Refund-Interest on refunds-Excess tax deduction at source–Entitled to interest on refund of excess deduction of tax at source under section 195 of the Act.
Infosys BPO Ltd. v. DCIT (2022) 192 ITD 94 / / 217 TTJ 478/ 214 DTR 89 (Bang)(Trib.)S. 194J : Deduction at source-Fees for professional or technical services-Transaction charges-TDS is deductible under section 194I and not under section 194J [S. 194I]
Shivnarayan Nemani Shares & Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2022) 192 ITD 50 (Mum.)(Trib.)S. 148 : Reassessment-Notice-Service of notice-Information through RTI-Generalistic notice issued without mentioning full and correct address of assessee would not be a valid notice for reopening of assessment-Matter remanded to the file of CIT(A). [S. 147]
Santosh (Smt.) v. ITO (2022) 192 ITD 189 (Delhi)(Trib.)S. 147 : Reassessment-Alleged non conduct of Audit-Reassessment notice is not valid. [S 44AB, 80IB(11A), 133(6), 148]
Bindra Warehousing Corporation v. ITO (2022) 192 ITD 15 (SMC) (Jabalpur)(Trib.)S. 145 : Method of accounting-No adverse findings by the Chartered Accountant who has audited books of account-Estimation of net profit is not justified.
Krishna Mohan Choursiya v. ITO (2022) 192 ITD 214 (Indore) (Trib.)S. 145 : Method of accounting-Scrap sale-Estimation of profit-Survey-Not able to reconcile-Addition is held to be justified. [S.133A]
Jaico Automobile Engineering Company (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2022) 192 ITD 147 (Bang.)(Trib.)S. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel-Period of limitation has to be strictly followed-Order passed beyond period of limitation prescribed under section 144C(4)(b) of the Act is declared invalid. [S. 144C(4)(b)]
Astro Offshore Pte. Ltd. v. DCIT(IT) (2022) 192 ITD 675 / 215 TTJ 1 / 209 DTR 26 (Delhi)(Trib.)S. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel-Condonation of delay-DRP does not have power to condone delay in filing objections by assessee before Panel.
Lam Research (India) (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2022) 192 ITD 449 (Bang.)(Trib.)