S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-
Capital gains-High Court affirmed the order of the Tribunal quashing of revision order.[S. 45]
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-
Capital gains-High Court affirmed the order of the Tribunal quashing of revision order.[S. 45]
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-
Capital gains-High Court affirmed the quashing of revision order-SLP of Revenue is dismissed, delay of 484 days is not explained.[S. 45, Art. 136]
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Interest on refunds-Order passed giving effect to the order of the CIT(A)-Order of Tribunal quashing the revision order is affirmed-SLP of Revenue is dismissed. [S. 244A, Art. 136]
PCIT v. Bank of Baroda (2024) 300 Taxman 266 (SC) Editorial : PCIT v. Bank of Baroda(2023) 294 Taxman 455 /333 CTR 835 (Bom)(HC)S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Circulars-Monetary limits-Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Tax liability in revenue appeal was below Rs. 1 crore, in view of Circular No. 5/2024, dated 15-3-2024 appeal is not maintainable before High Court. [S. 263, 268A]
PCIT v. Bhupendra Sharma (HUF) (2024) 300 Taxman 615 (All.)(HC)S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Review petition-First review petition was dismissed, benefit of authority in case of Khoday Distilleries Ltd v. Mahadeshwara Sahakara Sakkare Karkhane Ltd(2019) 262 Taxman 279 (SC) would not be applicable to facts-Second review petition was also to be dismissed.
Garden City Education Trust v. Dy. CIT (E) (2024) 165 taxmann.com 463 (Karn)(HC) Editorial : SLP against dismissal of review petition is dismissed, Garden City Education Trust v. Dy. CIT (E) (2024) 300 Taxman 594 (SC)S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Review petition before High Court which was dismissed as withdrawn without any liberty-SLP against order of High Court which was also dismissed-Another Review petition is also dismissed-SLP is dismissed. [Art. 136]
Garden City Education Trust v. Dy. CIT (E) (2024) 300 Taxman 594 /341 CTR 913 / 244 DTR 193(SC) Editorial : Garden City Education Trust v. Dy. CIT (E) (2024) 165 taxmann.com 463 (Karn)(HC), affirmed.S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal-Powers-Ex parte order by the Tribunal-Un explained cash credits-Negligent of the Chartered Accountant to make effective representation before the Tribunal-Negligence was not attributable to assessee,-Matter is restored before Tribunal to give an opportunity of hearing-Directed to deposit cost of Rs 25000 before the Tribunal.[S. 68, 260A]
Desert Infraspace (P.) Ltd. v. ITO (2024) 300 Taxman 406 (Guj.)(HC)S. 268A : Appeal – Monetary limits – Less than Rs.1 crore – Appeal of Revenue is dismissed – Contribution to construction of new bridge – Capital of revenue .[ S.37(1), 260A ]
CIT v. Velingkar Brothers [2020] 114 taxmann.com 727 (Bom)( HC)S. 158BC : Block assessment – No assessment could be made under section 158BC without issuing a notice u/s. 143(2) .[ S.143(2), 260A ]
CIT v. Sodder Builder & Developers (P.) Ltd. [2020] 115 taxmann.com 251 (Bom)( HC)S. 40A(2): Expenses or payments not deductible – Excessive or unreasonable -Stacking and handling expenses – Blending and screening charges to its sister concern – Order of Tribunal deleting the disallowance is affirmed .[ S. 260A ]
PCIT v. Ajit Ramakant Phatarpekar [2021] 277 Taxman 543 /[2020] 429 ITR 319 (Bom) (HC)