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. 260A : Appeal-High Court–Jurisdiction-Original Assessment in Delhi-Centralised at Ghaziabad after Search action-Punjab and Haryana High Court has no territorial jurisdiction to hear appeal. [S.143(3), 153A]
CIT v. ABC Papers Ltd. (2019) 414 ITR 668 (P&H)(HC)
S. 226 : Collection and recovery-Modes of recovery-Insolvency proceedings initiated-Priority of debts-Creditor and department-Declaration of moratorium by National Company Law Tribunal against assesse-Petition is held to be infructuous [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, S. 14(1), Art. 226, 227]
State Bank of India v. CIT (2019) 414 ITR 519 (P&H) (HC)
S. 194D : Deduction at source-Insurance commission–Tax was rightly deducted on net commission excluding service tax.
CIT v. Reliance Life Insurance Co. Ltd. (2019) 414 ITR 551/ 264 Taxman 296 (Bom.)(HC)
S. 194C : Deduction at source–Contractors-Services clerical in nature-Not technical or managerial services-Provisions of S.194C is applicable and not S.194J [S. 194J]
CIT v. Reliance Life Insurance Co. Ltd. (2019) 414 ITR 551 / 264 Taxman 296(Bom.)(HC)
S. 153B : Assessment-Search and seizure–Limitation-Order of assessment was despatched on last day prescribed–Not barred by limitation.[S. 132]
Rajan Jewellery v. CIT (2019) 414 ITR 621/177 DTR 369/308 CTR 602/ 266 Taxman 357 (Ker.)(HC)
S. 153A : Assessment–Search-Undisclosed income-Books of account found unreliable-Estimate of income on the basis of estimate is held to be valid. [S. 132(4)]
Rajan Jewellery. v. CIT (2019) 414 ITR 621/177 DTR 369/308 CTR 602/ 266 Taxman 357 (Ker.)(HC)
S. 148 : Reassessment–Notice issued in name of deceased assessee—Department attempting to correct error by changing name of entity in reasons to believe”—Not curable defects notice is invalid –Failure to issue notice u/s. 143(2) with in prescribed time – Reassessment is in valid. [S. 143(2), 147, 159, 29BB]
Rajender Kumar Sehgal v. ITO (2019) 414 ITR 286 (Delhi)(HC)
S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Approved garrulity fund –Failure to produce original order of approval does not amount to failure to disclose material facts–Reassessment notice is held to be not valid. [S. 36(1)(v), 148]
Valsad District Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd. v. ACIT (2019) 414 ITR 616 (Guj.)(HC)
S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-No new tangible material- Disclosing and explaining all material facts during assessment proceedings-Deficiency in reasons recorded cannot be rectified in affidavit-Reassessment is bad in law.[S. 143(3), 148 ]
Best Cybercity (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO (2019) 414 ITR 385/ 178 DTR 409/ 265 Taxman 100 /(2020) 313 CTR 711 (Delhi)(HC).Editorial : SLP of revenue is dismissed , ITO v . Best Cybercity (India) Pvt. Ltd ( 2021 ) 277 Taxman 394 ( SC)