S. 250 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)–Delay in filing appeals- Delay was condoned and the CIT(A) was directed to hear the appeal with in three months. [S. 10(23C)(iiiab), 11]
Yadhava Kalvi Nithi v. ITO (2018) 167 DTR 422 (Mad) (HC)S. 250 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)–Delay in filing appeals- Delay was condoned and the CIT(A) was directed to hear the appeal with in three months. [S. 10(23C)(iiiab), 11]
Yadhava Kalvi Nithi v. ITO (2018) 167 DTR 422 (Mad) (HC)S. 147 : Reassessment–Matter remanded to the AO for redoing the assessment after getting the reply from the assessee–Original order passed was set aside.[S. 148, 153C]
P. Thangaraju v. ITO ( 2018) 170 DTR 253 /( 2019) 306 CTR 89(Mad.)(HC)S. 145A : Method of accounting–Valuation–Inclusion of excise duty in closing stock–Tribunal remanded the matter–No substantial question of law. [S. 145, 260A]
PCIT v. Bridgestone India (P) Ltd. (2018) 167 DTR 427 (MP) (HC)S.145 : Method of accounting-Business expenditure–Provision for liquidated damages-Held to be not allowable as negotiation was in progress. [S. 37(1)]
FFE Minerals India (P) Ltd. v. JCIT (2018) 172 DTR 80 (Mad.)(HC)S. 2(22)(e) : Deemed dividend-Registered and beneficial share holder – Assessee is not share holder-Addition cannot be made as deemed dividend.
CIT v. Net work Systems & Technologies (P) Ltd. (2018) 172 DTR 445 (Ker.) (HC)S. 276B : Offences and prosecutions-Failure to pay to the credit tax deducted at source-Application for compounding of offence for delay in depositing tax deducted at source was dismissed only on ground that nobody attended proceedings when said application was taken up for hearing- order was to be set aside and, matter was remanded back for disposal on merits. [S. 278B, 279]
Durgeshwari Hi-Rise & Farms (P.) Ltd v. CCIT (2018) 172 DTR 343/( 2019) 103 taxmannn.com 292 (Bom.)(HC).S. 271AAA : Penalty-Search initiated on or after 1st June, 2007–Penalty cannot be levied on the ground that the assessee had not substantiated the manner in which the undisclosed income was derived is not sustainable where the assessee in the return of income had included that amount and no addition to the returned income was made by the Assessing Officer. [S. 132(4)]
PCIT v. Bhavi Chand Jindal (2018) 170 DTR 401 / 305 CTR 180/( 2019) 414 ITR 654 (Delhi )(HC )S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty–Concealment–Advance received not shown as income–Revised return filed showing advance as income– Deletion of penalty is held to be justified–TDS deducted but no prof was filed–Levy of penalty was held to be not justified.
CIT v. Trisha Krishnan. (2018) 170 DTR 209/ 95 Taxmann.com 105 (Mad)(HC) Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed , PCIT v. Trisha Krishnan ( 2019) 267 Taxman 394 (SC)S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Notice referred only one ground-Final order on other grounds– Claim of deduction examined by the AO- CIT was not justified in substituting his view–Revision is held to be bad in law. [S. 80IA]
CIT v. Maharashtra Hybrid Seeds Co. Ltd. (2018) 305 CTR 486 / 171 DTR 241 (Bom.)(HC)S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue–Captive power plant–Allocation of profit –Revision is held to be not justified. [S.80I, 260A]
PCIT v. Kochi Refineries (2018) 171 DTR 217 / 305 CTR 395 (Bom.)(HC)