S. 244A : Refund-Interest on refunds-Wrong PAN Number by the Depositor-The Revenue cannot be responsible-Not entitle to interest on refunds. [S.194C, Form No 16A, Art. 226]
Surya Construction v. UOI (2025) 302 Taxman 387 (Gauhati)(HC)S. 244A : Refund-Interest on refunds-Wrong PAN Number by the Depositor-The Revenue cannot be responsible-Not entitle to interest on refunds. [S.194C, Form No 16A, Art. 226]
Surya Construction v. UOI (2025) 302 Taxman 387 (Gauhati)(HC)S. 234C : Interest-Deferment of advance tax-COVID-19 pandemic-Dismissal of waiver application is set aside-Matter remanded to CCIT for a denovo consideration. [S.208, 209, Art. 226]
Grasim Industries Ltd. v. Chief CIT (Central) (2025) 302 Taxman 194 (Bom.)(HC)S. 234B : Interest-Advance tax-Non-Resident-Not liable for payment of interest-SLP of Revenue is dismissed due to low tax effect. [Art. 136]
DIT, IT v. Texas Instruments Incorporated (2025) 302 Taxman 7 (SC) Editorial : DIT, IT v. Texas Instruments Incorporated(2020) 275 Taxman 614 (Karn)(HC)S. 205 : Deduction at source-Bar against direct demand-Non-deposit of tax deducted at source-Employee cannot be held to be assessee in default-Tax department had without any warrant in law, foisted liability to pay such tax on employees-Demand notices issued to employees were quashed and set aside.[Art. 226]
Neenad Ashok Kadam v. IT Assessing Officer (2025) 302 Taxman 100 (Bom.)(HC)S. 192 : Deduction at source-Salary-Salaries in form of Grant-in-aid received by Nuns, Sisters or Missionaries working as teachers in religious institutions, from State Government, are liable to TDS-SLP of assessee is dismissed.[S. 15, Art. 136]
Institute of the Franciscan Missionaries of Mary v. UOI (2025) 302 Taxman 4 (SC) Editorial : UOI v. Society of Mary Immaculate (Tamil Nadu), Madras (2019) 262 Taxman 496/ 412 ITR 545 (Mad) (HC)S. 153B : Assessment-Search and seizure-Time limit-Amalgamation of four companies-Books of account or documents or assets seized were handed over to Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over searched person-Notice is not barred by limitation. [S. 153C, Art. 226]
Jupally Real Estate Developers (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2025) 302 Taxman 237 (Telangana)(HC)S. 151 : Reassessment-Sanction for issue of notice-Pendency of proceedings till proceeding before Appellate Authority or Revisionary Authority are decided, assessment order and further proceedings are stayed.[S.151A,246A 264, Art. 226]
Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd. v. ACIT (2025) 302 Taxman 551 (Bom.)(HC)S. 151 : Reassessment-Sanction for issue of notice-Application of mind-Notice is valid-SLP of Assessee is dismissed.[Art. 136]
Baldevbhai Bhikhabhai Patel v. Dy. CIT (2025) 302 Taxman 370 (SC) Editorial : Baldevbhai Bhikhabhai Patel v. Dy. CIT (2018) 94 taxnann.com 428 (Guj)(HC)S. 149 : Reassessment-Time limit-Notice dated 31-8-2024-Beyond period of six years-Notice and order is set aside. [S. 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), Art. 226]
Curadev Pharma Pvt Ltd v. Dy. CIT (2025) 302 Taxman 407 (Delhi)(HC)S. 149 : Reassessment-Time limit-Notice under section 148 dated 31-8-2024-Six years expired for the AY. 2016-17 the notice is quashed and set aside. [S. 148, Art. 226]
DB International Stock Brokers Ltd. v. ACIT (2025) 302 Taxman 405 (Delhi)(HC)