-
ITAT - No notional interest income accrued to assessee on capital contributions/loan by partners in absence of profits earned by the Partnership firms.
Minnow Trading Company Pvt. Ltd Vs The ITO
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21001 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
-
Clause (b) visualizes listing of shares in future, meaning thereby, the subsequent listing of shares should not be a bar for availing exemption u/s 10(23FB) of the Act. It can be noticed that the VCF Regulations prescribes conditions to be followed at the time of making investments only.
True North Fund IIIA (formerly Known as India Value Fund IIIA) Vs The Income-tax Officer
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21000 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 10(23FB)
-
Condonation of delay: There are large gaps which are unexplained. It is not known whether any action was taken against the officers who are responsible for the inordinate delay. The highest Court cannot be a walk in place to file any time irrespective of period of limitation prescribed. To blame it on the inefficiency of the administration is no more good excuse. Administration directed to hold an inquiry into the aspect as to who is responsible for such inordinate delay and take suitable action against the officers concerned (Post Master General vs. Living Media (2012) 3 SCC 563 referred)
Administrator vs. Swarn Theater
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20999 (SC)
-
Search & Seizure: The action of the GST authorities of camping in the assessee's home for 8 days and placing him under house arrest is illegal & a blatant abuse of powers. It has shocked the conscience of the court. This unauthorised action of the officers may tantamount to an offence under the Indian Penal Code. The officials cannot take shelter behind ignorance of law to justify their illegal actions. It is a matter of deep regret that the Chief Commissioner has attempted to justify such wrongful action on the part of the officials
Paresh Nathalal Chauhan vs. State Of Gujarat
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20998 (HC-GUJARAT)
-
S. 153A: Once the assessment gets abated, the original return filed u/s 139(1) is replaced by the return filed u/s 153A. It is open to both parties, i.e. the assessee and revenue, to make claims for allowance or disallowance. The assessee is entitled to lodge a new claim for deduction etc. which remained to be claimed in his earlier/ regular return of income (Continental Warehousing Corporation 374 ITR 645 (Bom) referred)
PCIT vs. JSW Steel Ltd
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20997 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 153A
-
S. 253(3) Condonation of delay: The tendency to perceive delay as a non-serious matter should be discouraged. The notion that the ITAT should always condone the delay should not be promoted. For mistake of lawyer to serve as valid consideration for the purpose of condonation of delay, the mistake must be such as may be made by a professional lawyer well-versed and experienced in law. "Useless advice" by a professional to not file appeal and to instead file a Cross Objection if Revenue filed the appeal cannot help the assessee because there was always going to be a chance that Revenue might not file appeal. Counsel must disclose the circumstances in which incorrect advice was given and, it is not sufficient to make a perfunctory and general statement that wrong advice was given bonafide (all judgements considered)
Boutique Hotels India (P) Ltd vs. ACIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20996 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 253(3)
-
Validity of directions made by ITAT to make assessments Harnarayan Bhagat and his three sons in the new status of Individuals / HUFs after holding that the earlier assessments made in the status of HUF / Individuals were not correct. Shri Harnarayan Bhagat was assessed in the status of HUF as Karta in respect of the business carried on in the name of Shri Radhakishan Balkishan.
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II VERSUS SHRI HARNARAYAN BHAGAT (HUF), M/S. GAURI SHANKAR, SHRI SHESH NARAYAN BHAGAT, SHRI HARNARAYAN BHAGAT, KHIRKIYA
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20995 (HC-MP) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82039&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
There are no categorical findings that the activities of GIDC are not genuine or are not in accordance with the objects of the trust or the institution. Merely because, by reference to the amended provisions in Section 2(15), it may be possible to contend that the activities of GIDC are covered under the proviso, that, by itself, does not render the activities of GIDC as non-genuine activities so as to entitle the CIT to exercise powers under Section 12AA(3) of the said Act.
GOA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANAJI GOA, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20994 (HC-BOMBAY) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82040&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Commissioner (Appeals) basically directed the AO to revisit the issue of disallowance but did not specifically interfere with or set aside the endorsement relating to the issuance of notice under Section 271 (1) (c) of the IT Act. From the tenor of the Order dated 16.11.2000, it is clear that the Commissioner (Appeals) did not wish to interfere with the endorsement at the stage of disposal of the appeal as the endorsement would undoubtedly lose its efficacy, in case, upon remand, the AO were to revoke the disallowance to the extent of ₹ 1,40,00,000/- thereby reducing the returned income to that which was originally declared by the appellant at the time of filing of the initial returns for the Assessment Year 1997-1998.
GANGADHAR NARSINGAS AGRAWAL (HUF) , VERSUS THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE – 1, MARGAO, GOA.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20993 (HC-BOMBAY) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82041&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Government of India demonetized ₹ 500 and ₹ 1000 notes on 08.11.2016. Between 01.11.2016 and 08.11.2016, the petitioner had collected a sum of ₹ 57,85,655/-which is also does not appear to be usual as compared to collections made during the November 2015. Out of the total collection of ₹ 57,85,655/-and a closing cash of ₹ 38,72,374/- as on 31.10.2016, the petitioner deposited an amount of ₹ 26,77,716/- which is also not in variance with the cash deposits made by the petitioner during the preceding financial year.
SALEM SREE RAMAVILAS CHIT COMPANY, PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1 (1), INCOME TAX OFFICE, NO. 3, GANDHI ROAD, SALEM
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20992 (HC-MADRAS) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82042&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
It is a well settled principle of law that an assessee, following the mercantile system of accounting, is not entitled to claim deduction until the liability for which deduction is claimed has accrued. The Act makes a distinction between actual liability in praesentia. The pay revision of employees of the appellant, a PSU is due every ten years with the expiry of one wage settlement or agreement. Invariably, there is a time lag between expiry of a wage revision and negotiation of a fresh wage revision.
HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY VERSUS ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RANGE 12 NEW DELHI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20991 (HC-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82044&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The proviso to Section 43B provides that nothing contained in the Section shall apply in relation to any sum which is actually paid by assessee on or before due date applicable in his case for furnishing the return in respect of the previous year in which the liability to pay such sum was incurred. The crucial words in the proviso to Section 43B are in respect of the previous year in which the liability to pay such sum was incurred.
MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD. (EARLIER KNOWN AS MARUTI UDYOG LTD.) VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20990 (SC) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82045&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The credit of Excise Duty earned by the appellant under MODVAT scheme as per Central Excise Rules, 1944 is not sum payable by the assessee by way of tax, duty, cess.
MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD. Vs COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20989 (SC) · Section 43B
-
Assessee's review petition is dismissed finding no substance in the submissions in the petition.
NRA IRON AND STEEL PVT. LTD. Vs PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) 1
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20988 (SC) · Section 68
-
Though, assessee was not required to prove source of the source, nonetheless, Tribunal took the view that Assessing Officer had made inquiries through the investigation wing of the department at Kolkata and collected all the materials which proved source of the source.
Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -1 Vs M/s. Ami Industries (India) P Ltd
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20987 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 68
-
Remedies by way of writ under Article 226 of the Constitution of India are extraordinary remedies exercised under the plenary jurisdiction conferred by the Constitution on the superior courts. The Constitution does not prescribe any limitation period for invoking writ jurisdiction.
KISHORE JAGJIVANDAS TANNA Vs JOINT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INV.) & ANR.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20986 (SC)
-
In the instant cases, the tax effect is said to be less than the monetary limit imposed and therefore, the Appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed, as withdrawn, keeping open the substantial questions of law for determination in appropriate cases.
Shri.R.Rajinikanth Vs Commissioner of Income Tax
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20985 (HC-MADRAS)
-
The provision made by the Assessee for 'Site Restoration cost' under the contractual obligations, made on scientific basis was clearly an allowable expenditure under Section 37(1) of the Act.
Vedanta Limited Vs The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20984 (HC-MADRAS) · Section 37
-
AO failed to point out any new tangible material to reopen the assessment u/s 147, thus the reassessment proceedings in the assessee's case is not valid.
Price Waterhouse & Co, Kolkata Vs DCIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20983 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
-
If land is purchased in director's name but is recorded in company's financials, it will not be considered as deemed dividend.
Shri Aloke Kumar Ghosh Vs ACIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20982 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.