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

Srei Equipment Finance Limited Vs Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income-tax (Calcutta High Court)

The Calcutta High Court has held that Srei Equipment Finance Limited Vs Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income-tax (Calcutta High Court) Date-10th May 2022 Sub- 1. Whether proceedings under the Income-tax Act,1961 has to be kept in abeyance once an order u/s 14 of the IBC code is passed. 2. Whether exchange of message in Chat box during the Video conference hearing can amount… Read More ...

CBDT Issues Guidelines and Procedure Compulsory Scrutiny of Returns during the Financial Year 2022-23

The CBDT has held that CBDT has issued guidelines for Compulsory Scrutiny of returns for Complete Scrutiny during the F.Y. 2022-23 and also procedure for compulsory selection in such cases. Read More ...

CBDT issues Instruction regarding Implementation of Hon. Supreme Court’s Judgement in Union of India vs. Ashish Agrawal dated 04.05.2022 (2022 SCC Online SC 543)

The CBDT has held that The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the extended reassessment notices issued under the old law shall be deemed to be the show cause notices issued under clause (b) of section 148A of the new law and has directed Assessing Officers to follow the procedure with respect to such notices. It has also held that… Read More ...

ABHINANDAN EXPORTS VS. ITO, WARD 23(1)(6) & ORS. (Bombay High Court)

The BOMBAY HIGH COURT has held that Bombay HC quashes reassessment notice and order disposing objections on the basis of affidavit in reply filed by the jurisdictional AO accepting error in issuing the impugned notice and order in view of year ending pressure leading to paucity of time to examine the audit objection; Assessee was subjected to scrutiny assessment for AY 2013-14… Read More ...

Shree Balkrishna Commercial Ltd vs Pr CIT (ITAT Delhi)

The ITAT Delhi has held that 263 quashed Read More ...

Dy CIT central Circle 2 V/s Bhagyalaxmi Rolling Mills Pvt Ltd (ITAT Pune)

The PUNE ITAT has held that Subsidy received under PSI 2007 from Government of Maharashtra was to promote industrial growth in the less developed areas of the State and also to provide employment in such area, hence such subsidy has to be a capital receipt not chargeable to tax. The amendment in provision of sec. 2(24) sub-clause (xviii) is applicable from… Read More ...

Union of India & Ors. vs. Ashish Agarwal (Supreme Court)

The Supreme Court has held that Hon. Supreme Court Validates Section 148 Notices issued after 31st March 2021 1. All notices issued under pre amended section 148 will be deemed to be issued under newly introduced section 148A 2. Revenue Authorities to follow the new procedure 3. All defences available to both the revenue and the assessee(s) under amended section 149.… Read More ...

Unisource Hydro Carbon Services Private Limited & anr. vs. Union of India & ors. (Calcutta High Court)

The Calcutta High Court, Division Bench has held that The Hon’ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam And The Hon’ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, passed judgement on 22.04.2022 and 02.05.2022 and allowed the Writ petition and set aside the order of the Learned Single Judge passed by the Hon’ble Justice Nizamuddin in WPA no. 2852 of 2022 and also set aside the orders of the Principal Commissioner of… Read More ...

Vapi Infrastructure and Industrial Township LLP v ITO (Bombay High Court)

The Bombay High court has held that Section 147 – Reopening – Lenders had shown very less income in the ITR – Held reopening is bad on account of change of opinion – High Court shows indulgence towards AO, refrains from issuing notice for perjury and imposing costs for making wrong statement in reply. Reopening was done beyond fours years on the… Read More ...

Kalpesh Synthetics Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (ITAT Mumbai)

The Mumbai Tribunal has held that S. 143(1) : Assessment -Adjustment based on Audit report - Employees contribution to provident fund-Amendment in Finance Bill 2021-Adjustment is not justified. [S. 2(24(x), 36(1)(va), 43B] Allowing the appeal of the assessee the Tribunal held that adjustment made by the CPC on the basis of Audit report is not valid as it is contrary to… Read More ...