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 ITAT Agra Bench has held that Section 43B: Employee’s Deduction – Before due date of filing of return – Binding Precedent – Order of Jurisdictional High Court – binding on AO situated within territorial jurisdiction and respective first appellate authority. The Hon’ble Income-tax Appellate Tribunal – Agra Bench in the case of Mahadev Cold Storage v. Jurisdictional AO ITA No.41 &… Read More ...
The Bombay High Court - Goa Bench (Full Bench) - Honourable Justice Mr. Dama Seshadri Naidu, Honourable Justice Mr Bharati H. Dangre, Honourable Justice , Smt. M.S. Jawalkar has held that S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty–Concealment-Non-striking off of the irrelevant part while issuing notice under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act,- Order is bad in law-Assessee must be informed of the grounds of the penalty proceedings only through statutory notice. An omnibus notice suffers from the vice of vagueness. [S. 274] A Full Bench of the Hon’ble… Read More ...
The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal-Mumbai Bench (SMC), Honourable Shri Sakijit Dey (Judicial Member) has held that S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes - Assessee is engaged in educational activities to spread education in matters relating to tax laws, other laws and accountancy-Entitle to exemption – Order of CIT (A) denying the exemption was reversed . [S.2(15)12A, 80G] Facts: The Assessee is a Charitable Organization which was established on November… Read More ...
The Delhi High Court has held that For AY 2018-2019 Draft Assessment Order and Show Cause notice were issued during lockdown which petitioner could not comply due to lockdown. National Faceless Assessment Centre completed the assessment on 23-5-2021 during lockdown itself. In this interim order Hon'ble Delhi High Court admitting the WRIT stayed the assessment order. Read More ...
The Delhi High Court has held that A careful perusal of clause (vii) of Section 144B (7) would show that liberty has been given to the assessee, if his/her income is varied, to seek a personal hearing in the matter. The usage of the word 'may' cannot absolve the Revenue from the obligation cast upon it, to consider the request made for… Read More ...
The Delhi Tribunal has held that S. 153A : Assessment-Search-HSBC Bank Geneva-No addition can be made without any incriminating documents seized in the Course of Search-When the information is not provided by Swiss Competent Authority- No addition can be made as undisclosed asset in Swiss Account- Addition was deleted-Penalty was quashed-DTAA-India-France. [S.90, 132(4), 153B(1)(a), Art.26] The Hon’ble Delhi ITAT held that… Read More ...
The Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court (JP Bench) has held that Facts : 143(3) read with sections 144B of the Income-taxAct, 1961 - Assessment year 2018-19 – Faceless Assessment – Caseof assessee selected for scrutiny stating “Compliancewith TDS provision on payment outside India” – AO issued various notices calling for information – Assessee dulyreplied to all the notices – Thereafter, AO straight away passed the impugnedassessment… Read More ...
The Delhi High Court has held that PCIT-8 Vs Sony Mobile Communications India Pvt ltd Forum- Deli High Court Date-18th May 2021 Sub-Whether when a company is merged with another company after the filing of return but before original assessment order is passed and the original order and subsequent order in pursuance of remand from high court, in passed in the old… Read More ...
The ITAT Mumbai has held that The Hon’ble ITAT – Mumbai Bench in the case of Shri Mohan Thakur v. ACIT ITA No. 1434-37/Mum/2018 dated May 24, 2021 where addition was made under section 69 of the Act on account of information received from Australian Authorities pertaining to an alleged havala transaction, it was held that there is absolutely no other… Read More ...
The Delhi High Court has held that The claim of the petitioner is that the impugned assessment order dated 21.04.2021 has been passed, without adherence to the statutory provisions contained in clauses (xiv) to (xvi) of Section 144B(1), and 144B(9) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”). The petitioner claims that the impugned assessment order was passed without passing… Read More ...