S. 143(3) : Assessment-Revision order is quashed by Tribunal-Assessment order became infructuous. [S. 143(3), 254(1)]
ACIT v. Tata Housing Development Company Ltd. (2024) 207 ITD 141 (Mum) (Trib.)S. 143(3) : Assessment-Revision order is quashed by Tribunal-Assessment order became infructuous. [S. 143(3), 254(1)]
ACIT v. Tata Housing Development Company Ltd. (2024) 207 ITD 141 (Mum) (Trib.)S. 143(2) : Assessment-Notice-Cash credits-Reassessment-Failure to issue statutory notice-Order is bad in law-Not curable defects.[S.68, 143(3) 147, 148, 292BB]
Ashish Sharma. v. ITO (2024) 207 ITD 386 (Amritsar) (Trib.)S. 143(1) : Assessment-Intimation-Penalty-Tax auditor had categorized amount in question as penalty-Prima facie disallowable under section 143(1)(a)(iv)-AO is not required to pass a speaking order for said adjustment made in strict terms-Matter remanded the matter to the file of CIT(A) to deciding a fresh on merit. [S.37(1), 143(1)(a)(iv)]
Joyo Plastics. v. ACIT (2024) 207 ITD 598 / 231 TTJ 918/242 DTR 225 (Mum) (Trib.)S. 143(1) : Assessment-Intimation-Appealable before Commissioner (Appeals)-Additions for ICDS and Any sum received from employees-Scrutiny assessment maintaining disallowance made under Section 143(1)-Challenged before CIT(A) against the order under section 143(3)-Failure to adjudicate additions/disallowance made under S.143(1)-Order of CIT(A) is affirmed-For challenging an intimation the assessee should file an appeal before the First Appellate Authority under S. 246A.[S.36(1)(va), 143(3),246A]
Alubound Dacs India (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2024) 207 ITD 393/232 TTJ 547/243 DTR 195 (Mum) (Trib.)S. 120 : Jurisdiction of income-tax authorities-No order is passed transferring the jurisdiction-Order is set aside.[S.2(7A), 120(4)(b) 127, 144C(13)]
ITO (IT) v. Tata Steel Ltd. (2024) 207 ITD 345 /230 TTJ 717/240 DTR 233 (Mum) (Trib.)S. 90 :Double taxation relief-Rate applicable to domestic companies-Non-discrimination clause-Higher rate of tax prescribed for foreign company is not to be regarded as violation of non-discriminatory clause, i.e., article 26 of DTAA between India-France. [Art. 26]
BNP Paribas. v. ACIT (2024) 207 ITD 532 (Mum) (Trib.)S. 90 : Double taxation relief-Tax credit-Tax paid in Kenia-Rule 128 was inserted by Income-tax (18th Amendment) Rules, 2016 and was made applicable with effect from 1-4-2017,-Could not be made applicable for relevant assessment years-Claim is allowed-DTAA-India-Kenia [S.91, R. 128, Form No 67, Art. 25]
KEC International Ltd. v. DCIT (2024) 207 ITD 193 (Mum) (Trib.)S. 90 :Double taxation relief-Rule 128 is directory in nature and not mandatory and, thus, foreign tax credit could not be denied to assessee merely on ground that Form No. 67 was filed belatedly.[Rule 128, Form No 67]
DCIT v. Prabha Nageshwar Rachakondawar. (2024) 207 ITD 162 (Nagpur) (Trib.)S. 80P : Co-operative societies-Interest-Co-Operative banks-Interest income not attributable to main business-Deduction is not allowable-Interest on investment made in Co-Operative banks-Eligible for claim of its cost of funds on entire interest income-Matter remanded. [S. 57, 80P(2)(a)(i), 80P(2)(d)]
Saptagiri Pattina Souharda Sahakari Sangha Niyamitha. v. ITO (2024) 207 ITD 41 (Bang) (Trib.)S. 80JJAA : Employment of new workmen-Audit report-Claim of deduction cannot be denied even if audit report might not have been filed along with return of income however the report was filed before passing of assessment order. [S. 139(1), 139(4), 143(1), Form No 10DA.]
Akuntha Projects (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Director-CPC (2024) 207 ITD 82 (Ahd) (Trib.)