{"id":20470,"date":"2021-07-21T11:28:38","date_gmt":"2021-07-21T05:58:38","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/asian-consolidated-industries-ltd-v-dy-cit-2020-114-taxmann-com-105-delhihc-editorial-slp-of-revenue-is-dismissed-dy-cit-v-asian-consolidated-industries-ltd-2020-270-taxman-184-sc\/"},"modified":"2021-07-21T11:28:38","modified_gmt":"2021-07-21T05:58:38","slug":"asian-consolidated-industries-ltd-v-dy-cit-2020-114-taxmann-com-105-delhihc-editorial-slp-of-revenue-is-dismissed-dy-cit-v-asian-consolidated-industries-ltd-2020-270-taxman-184-sc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/asian-consolidated-industries-ltd-v-dy-cit-2020-114-taxmann-com-105-delhihc-editorial-slp-of-revenue-is-dismissed-dy-cit-v-asian-consolidated-industries-ltd-2020-270-taxman-184-sc\/","title":{"rendered":"Asian Consolidated Industries Ltd. v. Dy.CIT (2020) 114 taxmann.com 105 (Delhi)(HC) Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed Dy.CIT v. Asian Consolidated Industries Ltd. (2020) 270 Taxman 184 (SC)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Allowing the appeal of the assessee\u00a0 the High Court held that\u00a0 amount received from sister concern in a running account were held not to constitute as an infraction under Section 269SS. Accordingly the\u00a0 Tribunal should\u00a0\u00a0 have\u00a0\u00a0 remanded matter back. High Court set aside the order of the Tribunal. Court observed that ITAT completely ignored its previous order which had the effect of restoring back to the AO the matter for the relevant AYs for fresh assessment. The judgment of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Jai Laxmi Rice Mills Ambala City (2015) 379 ITR 521 (SC). (AY. 1992-93)\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S. 271D : Penalty-Takes or accepts any loan or deposit-Amount received from sister concern in a running account were held not to constitute as an infraction under Section 269SS-Tribunal should   have   remanded matter back-Order of penalty was set aside. [S. 254(1), 269SS] <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-20470","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-5ka","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/20470","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=20470"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/20470\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":20471,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/20470\/revisions\/20471"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=20470"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=20470"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=20470"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}