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
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 ...
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 ...
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 ...
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 ...
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 ...
The ITAT Mumbai has held that The Assessing Officer-CPC has used a standard reason to the effect that “As there has been no response/the response given is not acceptable, the adjustment(s) as mentioned below are being made to the total income as per provisions of Section 143(1)(a)”, and has not even struck off the portion inapplicable. To put a question to… Read More ...
The Bombay High Court has held that S. 147 : Reassessment-With in four years-Change of opinion- Payment to related parties-Incentives to senior employees- Difference in VAT return and Turnover as per profit and loss account-Reconciliation-Questions asked in the course of original assessment proceedings-No discussion in the assessment order- Reassessment notice was quashed. [S. 40A(2)(b), 148, Art. 226] The assessment of the petitioner… Read More ...
The Bombay High Court has held that Reopening within four years – deemed rental income on stock in trade & Section 43CA on difference in Agreement value and stamp value – issues examined in original assessment proceedings- change of opinion – reopening is bad in law. Reopening was done on two issues. The first issue was that petitioner has, in the profit… Read More ...
The Bombay High Court has held that If NFAC is a party respondent, the cause title will state NFAC c/o. concerned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax and that Principal Commissioner of Income Tax shall accept service on behalf of NFAC. Read More ...