Judgements Uploaded By Users In Category: Income-Tax Act
These judgements are uploaded by our esteemed readers. If you have a judgement on an important topic that you would like to share with others, please use this form to upload it

BIMLAKUMARI LAJPATRAJ HURRA Versus INCOME TAX OFFICER (Gujarat High Court)

The Gujarat High Court has held that Reassessment under the old scheme - Reopening under section 148 - return processed under Section 143(1) - reasons stated that Capital Gain not disclosed by the assessee - Petitioner had filed objections and pointed out that capital gains were disclosed - objections rejected - Petitioner filed a writ stating reopening was invalid as the entire… Read More ...

The Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax(OSD), Circle-5, Pune vs M/s. Runwal Realtors Pvt. Ltd (ITAT Pune)

The ITAT Pune has held that Amount waived off by Investors i.e. Holders of Floating Rate Notes (FRNs) issued by Assessee Company to raise funds through External Commercial Borrowings (ECB), resulting into redemption of FRNs at a discounted rate below face value, is not taxable as income u/s 28(i), 28(iv) or under section 41(1) of Income Tax Act, 1961. Read More ...

ACIT vs. M/s. Jila Sahakari Kendriya Bank (DCCB) (ITAT Indore)

The ITAT Indore has held that Facts: (i)The assessee had claimed a total deduction of Rs. 10,00,00,000/- u/s 36(1)(viia) under two captions, namely : a)Provision for Non-Performing Assets - Rs. 5 crores; and b)Provision for standard assets – Rs. 5 crores. (ii) The Ld. AO after analysing section 36(1)(viia) of the income tax framed a view that: “Provision for NPA” is… Read More ...

Chennai Port Authority v. NFAC

The MADRAS HIGH COURT has held that S. 144B : Faceless Assessment-Natural justice-Hearing though video conference-Voluminous documents-Department has agreed to provide physical hearing at Chennai-Faceless converted to interface-Assessment order was set aside-Petitioner was directed to appear before Assessing Officer at Chennai. [S. 11, 260A, Art. 226] The petitioner has filed the return claiming the depreciation, which was disallowed by the Assessing Officer… Read More ...

Ajay Parasmal Kothari v. ITO

The Mumbai Tribunal has held that S. 4 : Charge of income-tax-Re development of building-Monthly rental compensation received from the builder for rent of alternative accommodation-Not utilised for paying alternative accommodation-Capital receipt-Not taxable as income from other sources-Delay of 1566 days in filing the appeal is condoned. [S. 56, 254(1)] The Tribunal condoned the delay of 1566 days in filing of… Read More ...

B.S. Hari v. UOI

The Supreme Court has held that S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal-Duties- Numbering of paragraphs in all orders-The Supreme Court urges the High Court and Tribunals to follow a uniform format for all its orders. The Hon’ble Supreme Court referring to the case of Shakuntala Shukla v. State of Uttar Pradesh LL 2021 SC 422 and State Bank of India v. Ajay… Read More ...

PCIT-2, Kolkata Vs Balmer Lawrie and Company Limited (Calcutta High Court)

The Calcutta High Court has held that PCIT-2, Kolkata Vs Balmer Lawrie and Company Limited(Calcutta High Court) Date-13th April, 2023 Sub-whether prior period expenditure can be claimed as an expenditure in the year in which the liability crystallises and whether diminution in the value of investment is eligible for deduction while computing book profit u/s 115JB of the Act? The Division bench… Read More ...

SPL Labs India Pvt ltd Vs ITO,Circle 6 Bangalore (Supreme Court)

The Supreme Court has held that SPL Labs India Pvt ltd Vs ITO,Circle 6 Banglore(Supreme Court) Date-19th April, 2023 Sub-whether in every case where tribunal determines Arms’ length Price (ALP), the same shall attain finality and high court is precluded from considering the determination of ALP once determined by tribunal , in terms of Section 260A of Income-tax Act,1961 The Supreme… Read More ...

ACIT, Circle-9(2), New Delhi Vs. Four Star Constructions Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Delhi)

The INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI Bench "B" has held that The present appeal has been filed by the revenue against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-34, New Delhi dated 20.09.2019. 2. The revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal:- “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.2,89,34,949/-… Read More ...

M/s. G K Steel & Wire Products Vs. Income Tax Officer (ITAT Delhi)

The INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI Bench "H" has held that This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-16 [hereinafter referred I.T.A. No. 3530/Del/2019 2 to CIT (Appeals)] New Delhi, dated 5.01.2018 for assessment year 2012-13 in sustaining the addition of Rs.25,32,724/- on account of stock difference. During the year under consideration, it was observed that… Read More ...