S. 276CC : Offences and prosecutions-Failure to furnish return of income-Filed belated return and also deposited amount of tax along with interest for delay which was accepted by authority concerned-No sentence could be imposed u/s 276CC of the Act [S.. 153A, 279(1). Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, S 397]
Suresh Kumar Agarwal v. UOI (2023) 456 ITR 148/ 291 Taxman 258 / 332 CTR 762/ 225 DTR 499(Jharkhand)(HC)
Digest of case laws
Online digest of latest case laws
This Digest of case laws is prepared by KSA Legal and AIFTP from judgements reported in BCAJ, CTR, DTR, ITD, ITR, ITR (Trib), Chamber's Journal, SOT, Taxman, TTJ, BCAJ, ACAJ, www.itatonline.org and other journals
Click here to download the pdf versions of the Digest of case laws S. 276C : Offences and prosecutions-Willful attempt to evade tax-Failure to disclose capital gain tax-Civil suit-Cost of Rs.50000 was expunged-Writ petition was dismissed-Civil Judge was directed to dispose the case preferably within a period of twelve months. [Indian Evidence Act, 1872, S.120, Art. 226]
P.S. Mallikarjun v. ITO (2023) 291 Taxman 275 (Mad.)(HC) Editorial: Order of single Judge is modified, P.S. Mallikarjun v. ITO (WP No.20575 of 2022 dt. 11-8-2022 (Mad)(HC)S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Additions was deleted-Penalty order was quashed.
PCIT v. Jayashree Jayakar Mohanka (Smt.) (2023) 291 Taxman 273 (Cal) (HC)S. 268A : Appeal-Instructions-Circulars-Monetary limits-Tax liability below 1 crore-Department appeal was dismissed.[S. 260A]
PCIT v. Bharat Infra Tech (P.) Ltd. [2022] 291 Taxman 185 (Karn)(HC)S. 264 : Commissioner-Revision of other orders-Rejecting the prayer for withdrawal of revision petition-Deciding on merit-Order set aside and remanded. [Art.226]
Rajendra Singh v. UOI (2022) 291 Taxman 168 (MP)(HC)S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Limited scrutiny-Mismatch of amount paid to related persons-Verification of expenditure-The issue which was not subject matter of limited scrutiny-Revision order to disallowance of expenditure under section 14A was quashed.[S. 14A, 40A(2)(b), 57]
PCIT v. Naga Dhunseri Group Ltd. (2023) 291 Taxman 278 (Cal.)(HC)S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Capital asset-Lease hold right-Capital or revenue-Cancellation of allotment of plot of land-Compensation-Treated as capital-receipt Revision order was quashed. [S. 2(14), 4, 28(i)]
PCIT v. Pawa Infrastructure (P.) Ltd. (2023) 457 ITR 392/291 Taxman 297 (Delhi)(HC)S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Initiation of proceedings based on a proposal given by the assessing officer-Without application of mind-Revision was quashed. [S. 10(38) 45]
PCIT v. Reeta Lakhmani (2023) 291 Taxman 358 (Cal)(HC)S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Purchase and sale of land-Capital asset-Intention to construct a Tech Park-No development activity-Revision is held to be not valid. [S. 2(14),28(i), 45, 143(3)]
Embassy Brindavan Developers v. CIT (2023) 457 ITR 234/ 291 Taxman 188 (Karn)(HC).Editorial : Notice issued in SLP filed by the Revenue , CIT v. Embassy Brindavan Developers (2023) 294 Taxman 437 (SC)S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal-Duties-Failure of Tribunal examine the matter on merits-Matter remanded. [S. 260A, 271 A ABB, 273B]
PCIT v. Sanjay Dhingra (2023)457 ITR 588/ 291 Taxman 291 (Cal)(HC)/PCIT v. Sidhant Gupta ( 2023) 457 ITR 588/ 291 Taxman 291 (Cal)( HC)