S. 270A:Penalty for under-reporting and misreporting of income-Penalty not leviable if ingredients specified for misreporting is not established by Assessing Officer. [S.270A(9)]
Saltwater Studio LLP v. NFAC (2023)108 ITR 381 (Trib) (Mum) (Trib)S. 270A:Penalty for under-reporting and misreporting of income-Penalty not leviable if ingredients specified for misreporting is not established by Assessing Officer. [S.270A(9)]
Saltwater Studio LLP v. NFAC (2023)108 ITR 381 (Trib) (Mum) (Trib)S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Fund investors resident of various countries-Non-fulfilment of condition of Liable to tax-Tax Exemption by resident country does not give right to Revenue Authorities to tax income in contracting State —Derivatives-Contention of Principal Commissioner that income earned from derivatives not business income is not accepted-Revision order is quashed. [S. 2(29A),6, 10(23FE, 900, 90A]
Sapein Funds Ltd. v CIT (IT) (2023)108 ITR 180 (Delhi)(Trib)S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Limited scrutiny assessment-Principal Commissioner issued show-cause notice entirely different from issues selected for limited scrutiny-Assessing Officer cannot go beyond reasons of limited scrutiny-Principal Commissioner cannot pass revision order on other aspects-Revision order is quashed. [S. 143(3)]
Gagandeep Garg v. PCIT (2023)108 ITR 137 (Amritsar) (Trib)AEP Investments (Mauritius) Ltd. v. Asst. CIT (IT) (2023)108 ITR 37 (Delhi)(Trib)
Aruna Tiwari (Smt.) v.PCIT (2023)108 ITR 40/226 TTJ 510 (Raipur) (Trib)S. 254(2A): Appellate Tribunal-Stay-Non-Resident having no assets in India-Directed to furnish a bank guarantee covering 20 Per Cent-Recovery of outstanding demand shall remain stayed for a period of 180 days from date of this order or till disposal of appeal, whichever ever is earlier. [S. 226]
AEP Investments (Mauritius) Ltd. v. Asst. CIT (IT) (2023)108 ITR 37 (Delhi)(Trib)S. 253 : Appellate Tribunal-Appeals-Memorandum of appeal-Two assessment orders-Contends are different-Matter remanded to Commissioner (Appeals) to verify and adjudicate de novo complying with principles of natural justice-Principal Chief Commissioner is directed to make a thorough enquiry.[S. 143(3), 250]
Dy. CIT v. Vintage Enterprises (2023)108 ITR 10 (SN)(Pune) (Trib)S. 253 : Appellate Tribunal-Appeals-Monetary limits for appeals by Department —Deduction only on actual payment-Employee’s contribution to employees’ State Insurance-Appeal is not maintainable. [S. 43B, 143(1)]
Dy. CIT v.Anil Kumar Jain (2023)108 ITR 41 (SN)(Chd) (Trib)S. 251 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Powers-No power to introduce new source of income-Commissioner (Appeals) must confine himself to items of income which were subject matter of original assessment. [S. 143(3)]
Alpha Reality v. Asst. CIT (2023)108 ITR 7 (SN)(Chennai) (Trib)S. 250 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Procedure-Ex-Parte order —Matter remanded to Commissioner (Appeals) with direction to assessee to remain present and make submissions. [S. 254(1)]
Nitin Amratlal Brahmbhatt v. ACIT (2023)108 ITR 18 (SN)(Mum) (Trib)S. 250 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Delay of 350 days-Delay in filing the appeal is condoned-Matter remanded to the file of the Assessing Officer to decide on merits.[S.144, 271(1)(c)]
Basant Sekhani v. ITO (2023)108 ITR 14 (SN)(Surat) (Trib)