Income Declaration Scheme, 2016
S. 183: Payment of tax – Failure to make third installment – Non-compliance- Order of single judge is set aside- Directed the assessee to make a fresh representation before the Competent Authority. [ Art , 226 ]
Income Declaration Scheme, 2016
S. 183: Payment of tax – Failure to make third installment – Non-compliance- Order of single judge is set aside- Directed the assessee to make a fresh representation before the Competent Authority. [ Art , 226 ]
S. 4 : Charge of income-tax – Alternative accommodation –Redevelopment agreement – Corpus monetary consideration -Rent for alternative accommodation – Hardship allowance – Capital receipt not taxable . [ S. 56 ]
Narayan Devarajn Iyengar v. ITO (2023) 201 ITD 503/ 223 TTJ 905( Mum)( Trib) www.itatonline .orgS. 69C : Unexplained expenditure -Capitalisation fee – Admission in medical college – Scribbling made on the back side of two pages which does not reveal that assessee had made any payment – Failure to give an opportunity of cross examination of Dean – Addition was deleted . [ S. 132 ]
Krishna D. Pawar v. ITO ( Mum)( Trib) www.itatonline .orgS. 147: Reassessment – After the expiry of four years- Non -Resident – Swiss account funds of non -resident – Credits in HSBC (Geneva) accounts originated outside Indian Territories. – Income deemed to accrue or arise in India – No business connection – Limitation – Extended period of 16 years is not applicable to non -Residents- Reassessment notice and order is held to be bad in law and quashed – DTAA -India -UK -French . [ S.6(1), 6(6), 9(1)(i) , 69,139(1) , 148 , 149(1), (149(1)( c), Art, 28 ]
Amrita Jhaveri (Ms.) v . Dy CIT ( Mum)( Trib) www.itatonline .org.37(1): Business expenditure – Sales and business promotion expenses -Gifting freebies to dealers and stockists – Performance in meeting sales targets – Allowable as a deduction – Circular No 5 of 2012 dt. 18 -2012 prohibits the benefit of freebies directly or indirectly to medical practioners and their professional associations and not to dealers and stockists .
Dy .CIT v. Curosis Healthcare Private Limited ( Jaipur )( Trib) www.itatonline .org.Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1948, ,S. 41: Endorsement of instruments on which duty has been paid – Development agreement – Alternative accommodation – Re development – Reference to re-development and homes is to be read to include garages, galas, commercial and industrial use and every form of society re-development – No stamp duty on permanent accommodation agreement(PAAA) , if the development agreement is stamped – Findings are not limited to the facts of the present cases only . [ S. 34, 39, 40 ]
Adityaraj Builders v . State of Maharashtra ( Bom)( HC) www.itatonline .orgS. 148A: Reassessment – Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice – Shell company – Natural justice – Reply was filed in response to notice under the old regime – Order passed without considering the objection was set aside – Directed to pass the order considering the objections filed by the assessee. [S.143(2), 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), Art , 226 ]
Sahil Infra Creative Pvt Ltd v. ITO (Surat) (2023) 455 ITR 11 / 294 Taxman 113 ( Guj)( HC) www.itatonline.orgBlack Money ( Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets ) and Imposition of Tax Act , 2015 )
S.43: Penalty for failure to furnish in return of income, information or furnish inaccurate particulars about an asset ( including financial interest in any entity ) located outside India – Foreign insurance policy was not declared in the return- Bonafide mistake – Levy of the penalty of Rs 10 lakhs was deleted. [ S.10(3), Income -tax Act , 1961 , 139 ]
Addl. CIT v. Tejal Ashis Mehta ( Mum)( Trib) www.itatonline .orgRight to Information Act ,(22)of 2005 .
S. 8(1)(e): Exemption from disclosure -Legal advice given by Advocate General to State Government-Lawyer and client is fiduciary relationship – exempt from disclosure. [ Art. 165(2) ]
Secretary to Advocate General , Ernakulam v . State Information Commissioner AIR 2023 Kerala 72Advocate Act , 1961
S. 34: Power of High Courts to make rules – Imposition of dress code for advocates – National company law Tribunal – Only High Courts can frame rules for dress code for the appearance of advocates before courts and Tribunals, subordinate to it -Tribunals have no authority to issue any instructions determining the dress code for the appearance of advocates before it .[ Bar Council of India Rules ( 1975) , Chap .4 , Companies Act ( 18 of 2013) , S. 432 , National Company Law Tribunal Rules ( 2016) R. 16 (f) , 124 ]
R.Rajesh v.UOI AIR 2023 Madras 107