S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty – Concealment – Search and seizure- Return filed after search action- Income returned was accepted -In the absence of addition no penalty can be levied . [ S. 132 , 153C, 271C ]
PCIT v. Rajkumar Gulab Badgujar ( 2019) 111 taxmann.com 256 / 267 Taxman 489 (Bom) (HC) Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed PCIT v. Rajkumar Gulab Badgujar ( 2019) 267 Taxman 488 (SC)
Digest of case laws
Online digest of latest case laws
This Digest of case laws is prepared by KSA Legal and AIFTP from judgements reported in BCAJ, CTR, DTR, ITD, ITR, ITR (Trib), Chamber's Journal, SOT, Taxman, TTJ, BCAJ, ACAJ, www.itatonline.org and other journals
Click here to download the pdf versions of the Digest of case laws S.147: Reassessment -Failure to file return- Huge loss – National and muticommodity exchange – Objections stating that no income was erned and suffered heavy loss not considered – Reassessment is held to be bad in law .[ S. 139 , 148 Art. 226 ]
Mohanlal Champalal Jain v. CIT ( 2019) 102 taxmann.com 293 (Bom) (HC) Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed ITO v. Mohanlal Champalal Jain ( 2019) 267 Taxman 391 (SC)Limitation Act , 1963 .
S.5 : Extension of prescribed in certain cases – Condonation of delay- 916 days- A liberal approach is to be taken in the matter of condonation of delay – The consideration for condonation of delay would not depend on the status of the party , namely the Government or the pubic bodies – Condonation of delay is not automatic- No proper explanation was filed for condonation of delay – Condonation of delay was dismissed . [Civil Procedure, 1908, Order XXI of the Code Art. 226 ]
Interpretation of taxing statutes – Constitution of India
Art. 141 : Precedent – SLP dismissal – Non-speaking order -It does not constitute a declaration of law under Article 141 of the Constitution, or attract the doctrine of merger. [ Art, 136 ]
S. 244A: : Refund – Interest on refunds – Unauthorized retention of money by the Department – The Department is directed to pay interest as prescribed .
Universal Cable Ltd. v. CIT( 2020) 420 ITR 111/312 CTR 1/ 185 DTR 33/ 270 Taxman 170(SC), www.itatonline.org Editorial: Order in Universal Cable Ltd. v. CIT ( 2009) 26 DTR 98/ (2011) 237 CTR 157 (MP ) (HC ) is set aside .S. 147: Reassessment – After the expiry of four years- Bogus purchases- Accommodation entries- No failure to disclosure material facts- Change of opinion- Reassessment is held to be bad in law .[ S. 69C ,148 ]
Usha Exports v. ACIT ( 2020) 312 CTR 237/ 185 DTR 87 (Bom)(HC), www.itatonline.orgS. 147: Reassessment- After the expiry of four years- Bogus share application money – Shell company – Money received from dubious companies -0 Reassessment is held to be valid – Cost of 2 lakh was imposed on assessee for wasting Court’s time [ S. 68, 143(3) , 148 , Art, 226 ]
RDS Project Ltd v. ACIT ( 2020) 312 CTR 345/185 DTR 180 (Delhi)(HC), www.itatonline.orgS. 139 : Return of income – Delay in filing revised return- Amalgamation – Approval by NCLT – Revised return filed after due date of filing of return is irrelevant- Not required to seek condonation of delay by CBDT [ S. 119(2) (b) , 139 (5) , 170 ]
Dalmia Power Ltd v. ACIT /(2019) 112 taxmann.com 252/ (2020) 269 Taxman 352 / 312 CTR 113/420 ITR 339 /185 DTR 1(SC), www.itatonline.org Editorial: Order in ACIT v Dalmia Power Ltd ( 2019) 418 ITR 242 // 312 CTR 127/ 185 DTR 16 (Mad)(HC) is reversed.S. 69C : Unexplained expenditure – Bogus purchases – Sales accepted – The AO is directed to restrict the addition to the extent of lower GP declared by the assessee in respect of bogus purchases as compared to G.P. on normal purchases. [S.68 ]
Hemant M. Mehta HUF v. ACIT (SMC) (Mum)(Trib), www.itatonline.orgS. 148 : Reassessment – Notice – Notice sent at address available in PAN database returned – Communication had to be delivered at address of assessee available with banking company – No service of reopening notice – Order making additions unjustified. [S. 147, 282 , R, 127 , Art .226 ]
Harjeet Surajprakash Girotra v. UOI (2019) 180 DTR 257 266 Taxman 29 (Bom.)(HC)