S. 14A : Disallowance of expenditure – Exempt income -Disallowance cannot be made in excess of actual exempted income-Matter remanded . [ R.8D ]
Pragathi Krishna Gramin Bank. v. JCIT (2018) 256 Taxman 349 (Karn)(HC)S. 14A : Disallowance of expenditure – Exempt income -Disallowance cannot be made in excess of actual exempted income-Matter remanded . [ R.8D ]
Pragathi Krishna Gramin Bank. v. JCIT (2018) 256 Taxman 349 (Karn)(HC)S. 4 : Charge of income-tax -Capital or revenue -Power subsidy received by assessee company from State Government under Power Intensive Industries Scheme, 2005, for setting up a new industrial unit in backward area was capital receipt and, thus, not liable to tax
CIT v. Keventer Agro Ltd. (2018) 256 Taxman 437 (Cal) (HC)S. 4 : Charge of income-tax – Interest on bank deposits out of share capital- Prior to commencement of business operations- Interest is liable to be assesses as income from other sources- interest income would go to reduce capital cost of project and was on capital account and same could not be taxed as income from other sources [ S.56 , 145 ]
PCIT v. Bank Note Paper Mill India (P.) Ltd. (2018) 256 Taxman 429 / ( 2019) 412 ITR 415 (Karn ) ( HC) Editorial: Order in, ITO v Bank Note Paper Mill India P.Ltd ( 2017) 56 ITR 226 (Bqng) (Trib) is affirmed .S. 281 : Certain transfers to be void – Failure by Department to bring on record service of notice under Rule 2 — Charge registered by Sub-Registrar six and a half years after sale deed registered in favour of purchaser — Order declaring transfer null and void and notice for auction of property set aside .[ S.179(1) 220, 222 SCH II, RR. 2, 16.]
Rekhadevi Omprakash Dhariwal v. TRO (2018) 406 ITR 368/ 257 Taxman 109 / 304 CTR 430/ 168 DTR 427(Guj) (HC)S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue – Writ against notice is not maintainable , except where the Commissioner lacks jurisdiction .[ Art 226 ]
Designmate India P. Ltd v. CIT ( 2018) 406 ITR 443 ( Guj) (HC)S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue – Commissioner (Appeals) — Merger- Development expenses –Commission- Orders passed by Assessing Officer was merged with order of CIT(A) – Revision order is held to be not valid
CIT v. H. Nagaraja. (2018) 406 ITR 242 (Karn) (HC)S. 230 : Collection and recovery – Tax clearance certificate – liability of the assessee was more than Rs. 400 crores.- Insistence on a tax clearance certificate for the assessee to leave the country under the first proviso to sub-section (1A) of S.230 of the Act is valid .
Mailakkattu Varghese Uthup (NO. 1) v. PCIT (2018) 406 ITR 289 / 304 CTR 1000/ 170 DTR 321 (Ker) (HC) Editorial: Order of single judge is affirmed; Mailakkattu Varghese Uthup (NO. 2) v. PCIT (2018) 406 ITR 296/304 CTR 1006 /170 DTR 326 (Ker) (HC)S. 179 : Private company – Liability of directors -Person treated as Director should be given opportunity to be heard.
Mailakkattu Varghese Uthup (NO. 1) v. PCIT (2018) 406 ITR 289/ 304 CTR 1000/ 172 DTR 321 (Ker) (HC) Editorial: Order of single judge is affirmed; Mailakkattu Varghese Uthup (NO. 2) v. PCIT (2018) 406 ITR 296 /304 CTR 1006 /170 DTR 326(Ker) (HC)S.147: Reassessment — With in four years- Deduction allowed from Income from other sources in original assessment — No new facts on record — Reassessment to withdraw deduction is not valid .[ S. 56, 57(iii), 148]
Kumar’s Metallurgical Corporation Ltd. v. JCIT ( 2018) 406 ITR 386 (T&AP) (HC)S.147: Reassessment-After the expiry of four years- Reasons recorded referring to facts already on file of Assessing Officer- —No rational and tangible nexus between reason and belief — Reassessment proceedings quashed.[ S.148 ]
Kanpur Texel (P.) LTD. v. DCIT (2018) 406 ITR 353 (All) (HC)