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

E-Land Apparel Ltd. v. ACIT (Bombay High Court)

The Bombay High Court has held that S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Interest and property tax paid subsequently after slump sale-Claimed as deduction in the year of payment-Amount disclosed in tax audit report relying on case law-Reassessment notice for incorrect claim- Change of opinion-Reassessment notice was quashed. [S. 43B, 44AB, 148 , Art. 226] In the Form No 3CD… Read More ...

Rakesh Garg Vs PCIT Ajmer (Rajasthan High court)

The Rajasthan high court has held that Rakesh Garg Vs PCIT Ajmer Forum-Rajasthan High Court Date-17th February 2022 Sub-Whether Appeal filed before ITAT after the cut-off date of 31/1/2020 and delay in filing the appeal having been condoned, the application under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act 2020 is eligible to be accepted or is to be rejected in terms of FAQ No… Read More ...

DCIT v. Dilip J. Thakkar (ITAT Mumbai)

The Mumbai Tribunal has held that S. 149 : Reassessment-Foreign asset-HSBC Geneva account of Trust -Time limit for notice-16 years-Assets held outside India- Introduced vide Finance Act, 2012-Retrospective in nature. [S. 147, 148, 151] A search and seizure operation were carried out in the assessee’s premises on August 10, 2011. Documents were found pertaining to a foreign bank account, based on… Read More ...

Creative Museum Designers Vs ITO,Exemptions,Ward 1(1),Kolkata (Calcutta high court)

The Calcutta High Court has held that Creative Museum Designers Vs ITO,Exemptions,Ward 1(1),Kolkata Date-10th February 2022 Forum-Calcutta High court Sub-Whether the activity of the petitioner of setting up of museums, science parks, planetariums, interactive galleries, exhibits and other forms of dissemination of knowledge through informal means, at the behest of other public bodies or entities, be regarded as commercial in nature and… Read More ...

Rohan Developers Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO (IT) (Bombay High Court)

The Bombay High Court has held that S. 195 : Deduction at source - Non-resident – Lower deduction of tax – Indexation – Binding precedent – Order of Tribunal is binding on lower Authorities - Capital gains - Cost of acquisition of the property in the hands of seller is deemed to be the cost for which the said property was acquired… Read More ...

Tata Sons Limited v. Dy.CIT (Bombay High Court)

The Bombay High Court has held that S. 147 : Reassessment – After the expiry of four years - No failure to disclose material facts – Change of opinion – Capital gains or business income – Sale of shares – Reassessment proceedings are quashed. [S. 28(i), 45, 148, 154, Art. 226] The assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Act and… Read More ...

Nirmal Bang Securities Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT (Bombay High Court)

The Bombay High Court has held that S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-No failure to disclose material facts-Information based on search of third party -Reason recorded not indicated anywhere or any stretch of imagination the income has escaped assessment–Non application of mind by the sanctioning authority–Observed that the Assessing Officers will record better reasons for reopening and the Authority… Read More ...

Lokhanwala Construction Industries v. Dy. CIT (Bombay High Court)

The Bombay High Court has held that S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Builder stock in trade-Notional income-Reassessment notice on the basis of Judgement of Delhi High Court in Ansal Housing Finance and Leasing Company Ltd. (2013) 354 ITR 180 (Delhi)(HC) to assessee the income under section 23 of the Act was quashed. [S. 22, 23(5), 148, Art. 226] The… Read More ...

Ambika Iron and Steel Pvt. Ltd v. PCIT (Orissa High Court)

The Orissa High Court has held that S. 151 : Reassessment - Sanction for issue of notice–Issuance of Notice requires the sanction of PCIT where the Notice is issued after 4 years – Relaxation Act not a bar for appropriate sanction- Reassessment notice is held to be bad in law. [S. 147, 148, Art, 226] It has been held that where the… Read More ...

Sudesh Taneja v. ITO (Rajasthan High Court)

The Rajasthan High Court has held that S. 148: Reassessment – Notice-Constitutional validity – The delegation authorized being only for the purpose of enlarging limitation under a valid law, such delegation could not be exercised to resurrect the provision of law that stood omitted from the statute book by virtue of its substitution made by the Finance Act, 2021, w.e.f. 01.04.2021 –… Read More ...