S. 4 : Charge of income-tax-Carbon credit-Power generation-Capital receipt not liable to be taxed.
CIT v. Wescare (I) Ltd. (2022) 138 Taxmann.com 184 (Mad.)(HC) Editorial: Notice issued in SLP filed by Revenue, CIT v. Wescare (I) Ltd. (2022) 287 Taxman 93/113 CCH 273 (SC)
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. 237: Refunds- Refunds due but issue pending appeal in the Apex Court- Refund allowed.[S.240, Art , 226 ]
Amadeus IT Group SA v. ACIT (2022) 325 CTR 246 / 210 DTR 78( Delhi)(HC)S. 226 : Collection and recovery – Modes of recovery –
Garnishee notice- Amounts taken pursuant to garnishee notice when no liability to pay income tax dues are liable to be refunded [S. 226 (3), Art . 226 ]
Prohibition of Benami Property Transaction Act, 1988
S. 49 : Appeal – High Court – Memorandum of appeal – Substantial question of law – No substantial question of law had been raised even before Supreme Court, Special Leave Petition against High Court’s judgment was to be dismissed [ ITACT, S. 260A, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 , S.100 ]
Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 .
S. 49 : Appeal – High Court – Second appeal – Substantial question of law – Order passed without framing substantial question of law- Order of High Court quashed and set aside . [ ITACT, S. 260A, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 , S.100 ]
Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988
S. 2(9): Benami transactions – Transactions or arrangements – Failure to produce documents to prove income – Property purchased in the name of wife – Sale agreement is valid .[ S. 2(9)(A)(b)(iii) ]
Ashok Kumar Subba v. Bomal Kumar Jain (2022) 287 Taxman 240 / 113 CCH 331 (Sikkim)(HC)Income Declaration Scheme of 2016,
S. 195 : Power to remove difficulties-Not depositing the first instalment with in time-Board refusing to condonation of delay-Concession and excess indulgence would have demotivating effect on honest taxpayers making regular and prompt tax deposit-Dismissal of application is held to be not justified. [S. 184, ITA, S. 119,(2),(Art.14]
Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015
S.10(1): Assessment – No summons are pending – Permitted to travel to UAE and Thailand, with a direction that he shall return to India on or before 6-4-2022, subject to furnishing of security as specified and subject to furnishing a full itinerary of his stay at UAE and Thailand, along with a functional phone number [ Art , 226 ]
S. 32: Depreciation –Good will- Order of Tribunal – Binding precedent – Decision of Tribunal is binding unless there is stay [ 144C , 254(1) , Art , 226 ]
Mylan Laboratories Ltd v. Addl .JCIT (2022)446 ITR 734 / 287 Taxman 40// 220 DTR 105/ 329 DTR 502 (Telangana)(HC)S. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel – Draft assessment order — Depreciation – Binding precedent – Decision of Supreme Court binding on all Courts and all authorities- Appellate Tribunal – Decision of Tribunal is binding on all authorities [ S. 32, 144C ,(8), 254(1) , Art , 226 ]
Mylan Laboratories Ltd. v. NFAC (2022)446 ITR 734 / 287 Taxman 40 // 220 DTR 105/ 329 DTR 502(Telangana) (HC)