S. 220 : Collection and recovery–Stay–Appeal pending before CIT(A)-Assessee has given liberty to approach the AO to stay the demand. [S. 220(3), 220(6), 246A]
Veisa Technologies. v. ACIT (2019) 263 Taxman 600// (2020)422 ITR 536 (Mad.)(HC)S. 220 : Collection and recovery–Stay–Appeal pending before CIT(A)-Assessee has given liberty to approach the AO to stay the demand. [S. 220(3), 220(6), 246A]
Veisa Technologies. v. ACIT (2019) 263 Taxman 600// (2020)422 ITR 536 (Mad.)(HC)S. 194C : Deduction at source–Contractors-Placement fees/carriage fees – work contract and not fees for technical service. [S. 194J]
CIT v. Times Global Broadcasting Co. Ltd. (2019)105 taxman .com 313 / 263 Taxman 466 (Bom.)(HC) Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed, CIT v. Times Global Broadcasting Co. Ltd. (2019) 263 Taxman 465 (SC)S. 154 : Rectification of mistake-Relief for income-tax-Arrears or advance of salary–Failure to claim in return–Rectification order passed by the AO is held to be without jurisdiction. [S.89(1)]
Gurmeet Singh Vilkhu v. PCIT (2019) 263 Taxman 636/ 307 CTR 799/ 176 DTR 105 (MP)(HC)S. 151 : Reassessment-Sanction for issue of notice-Sanction order indicated non-application of mind to reasons recorded for reopening, therefore, reopening notice was bad in law and quashed. [S.147, 148]
My Car (Pune) (P.) Ltd. v. ITO (2019) 263 Taxman 626/ 179 DTR 236 (Bom.)(HC)S. 147 : Reassessment–With in four years- On the day of furnishing the recorded reasons–Reassessment order is passed -Order passed in hasty manner–Order is seta side. [S. 148]
Kanchan Agarwal (Mrs.) v. ITO (2019) 263 Taxman 682 (Karn.)(HC)S. 147 : Reassessment-Cash credits-Share application money-Huge premium-Genuineness of transaction or creditworthiness of individual providing money were apparently not established–Issue of reassessment notice is held to be justified.[S. 68, 148]
Max Ventures Investments Holdings (P.) Ltd. v. ITO (2019) 415 ITR 395 / 263 Taxman 401/ ( 2019) 179 CTR 228/ 309 CTR 372 (Delhi)(HC)S. 147 : Reassessment–After the expiry of four years-Book profit-Subsidy received by assessee from Government was directly credited to capital reserve account-Sufficient disclosure of facts– Reassessment is held to be bad in law.[S. 115JB, 148]
Pandesara Infrastructure Ltd. v. Dy.CIT (2019) 105 taxmann.com 181 / 263 Taxman 367 (Guj.)(HC) Editorial : SLP of revenue is dismissed, Dy. CIT v. Pandesara Infrastructure Ltd. (2019) 263 Taxman 366 (SC)S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years- Penny stock – Shares-No failure to disclose all material facts- Merely on basis of information received from Investigation Wing without conducting any independent enquiries. [S. 69A, 148]
South Yarra Holdings v. ITO (2019) 263 Taxman 594 (Bom.)(HC)S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years- Prior period expenses – Disclosed all material facts necessary for assessment-Initiation of reassessment proceedings merely on basis of change of opinion is not justified.[S. 37(1), 148]
CMI FPE Ltd. v. UOI (2019) 263 Taxman 433 (Bom.)(HC)S. 143(3) : Assessment–Alternative remedy-Writ against the assessment order is not valid since the assessee had an alternative remedy before Appellate Authority. [S. 246A, Art. 226]
Mahesh Kumar Agarwal v. PCIT (2019) 105 taxmann.com 272 / 263 Taxman 469(Orissa )(HC) Editorial : SLP of the assessee is dismissed and passed the order stating that no coercive steps will be taken for a period of four weeks from the date of the order in order to avail of the alternative remedy provided. Mahesh Kumar Agarwal v. Pr. CIT (2019) 263 Taxman 468 (SC)