S. 192 : Deduction at source-Salary to partners-Not liable to deduction of tax at source. [S. 15, Explanation 2, 40(a)(ia), 40(b)(v)]
Asst. CIT v. Dhar Construction Co. (2023)199 ITD 124 / 101 ITR 49 (SN)(Gauhati) (Trib)S. 192 : Deduction at source-Salary to partners-Not liable to deduction of tax at source. [S. 15, Explanation 2, 40(a)(ia), 40(b)(v)]
Asst. CIT v. Dhar Construction Co. (2023)199 ITD 124 / 101 ITR 49 (SN)(Gauhati) (Trib)S. 153A : Assessment-Search-Warrant of authorization and panchanama clearly shows name of the assessee-Assessment proper. [S. 132]
Pujala Mahesh Babu v. Asst. CIT (2023)101 ITR 458 (Hyd) (Trib)S. 153A : Assessment-Search or requisition-Cash Credits-No incriminating material found during search-Unabated assessment-Addition is not sustainable. [S.68]
Asst. CIT v. Paramount Probuild Pvt. Ltd. (2023) 101 ITR 36 (SN) (Delhi) (Trib)S. 151 : Reassessment-Sanction for issue of notice-Sanction of CIT instead of A/JCIT-Notice bad in law. [S. 147, 148]
Pawan Green Channels Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2023) 101 ITR 19 (SN) (Chennai)(Trib.)S. 148 : Reassessment –Notice-Dissolution of Company-Company had been struck off from Register of Companies-Officially not intimidated to AO-Reassessment notice is valid.[S. 147]
Pawan Green Channels Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2023) 101 ITR 19 (SN) (Chennai)(Trib.)S. 147 : Reassessment-With in four years-Income escaping assessment-No fresh material with AO to form opinion that income escaped assessment-Opinion based on incorrect basis-Proceeding on the basis of conjectures-Reassessment without jurisdiction. [S. 148]
Milind Madhukar Edke v. ITO (2023)101 ITR 88 (SN) (Pune) (Trib)S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Validity-Assessee, Power of Attorney holder and selling land for owner-No evidence indicating land belonged to assessee-Assessment made in the hands of assessee not justified.
Kamaldeep Singh v. ITO (2023) 101 ITR 302 (Amritsar)(Trib.)S. 145 : Method of accounting –Rejection of accounts-Net profit rate-Addition by applying net profit rate on total turnover-Accounts correct and complete-Loss suffered due to increase cost verifiable from books-Addition to be deleted.[S. 145(3)]
R. G. Colonizers Pvt. Ltd. v Dy. CIT (2023)101 ITR 409 (Jaipur) (Trib)S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue – depreciation –Leased equipment – Revision order is quashed .[ S. 32 ]
Indianoil petronas P. Ltd. v. PCIT (2023) 203 ITD 116 (Kol (Trib)S.69: Unexplained investment – Mismatch of dates in customer ledger account – Addition is not justified .
Shalini Gupta v. ACIT (2023) 203 ITD 138 ( Delhi)( Trib)