-
HC - Revision u/s 263 by CIT - Assessment order indicate that the AO has made enquiry on various issues as such order cannot be said to be “prejudicial to the interests of Revenue".
PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ALWAR VERSUS M/S HARI OM STONES, C/O-SHRI OM PRAKASH SHARMA
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19233 (HC-RAJASTHAN) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=78621&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - The creditworthiness of the lenders and the genuineness of the transaction was not clear and even the lenders summoned by the AO had not submitted their income tax returns. Therefore, the addition u/s 68 was sustained.
SATLUJ SHIKSHA SAMITI, BERLI KALAN, REWARI VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ROHTAK
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19232 (HC-P&H) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=78622&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Allotment of immovable property by assessee-firm to retiring partners towards their share in partnership on retirement is not transfer u/s 45(4).
National Company Vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19231 (HC-MADRAS) · Section 45(4)
-
ITAT - Payment of incentive bonus was dependent upon the performance of employees and also it was not a case of statutory bonus payment under the Payment of Bonus Act, hence rules that Sec.43B was inapplicable.
Harita NTI Limited Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19230 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Section 43B
-
ITAT - (i) Taxability of an amount received by a partner on retirement from firm explained. (ii) Excess payment to a retiring partner over and above the sum standing to the credit of his capital account at the time of retirement should be treated as capital gains.
Savitri Kadur Vs The Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19229 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
-
HC - The assessee is the purchaser and not the seller and hence, the valuation adopted by the Stamp authority could not have been made the basis from coming to the conclusion that there is unexplained investment. u/s 69B.
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 3 VERSUS DHARMAJA INFRASTRUCTURE
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19228 (HC-GUJARAT) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=78609&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Tribunal was required either to accept the reasons and dismiss the appeal or not to accept it. If it did not accept the reasons, it was obliged to give its own reasons and dispose of the appeal.
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) VERSUS RAMA PRASAD GOENKA FOOTBALL ACADEMY
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19227 (HC-CALCUTTA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=78611&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Upheld the ITAT's order invoking Section 62(2) r.w.Sec. 61(1) which would apply only to the Revocable Transfer of the funds made for a period which is not specified and these above circumstances, it would be taxable in the hands of the Transferor/beneficiaries and not in the hands of the Trust.
Tamilnadu Urban Development Fund Vs The Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19223 (HC-MADRAS)
-
HC - ITAT erred in following jurisdictional HC full bench ruling on Sec. 234B interest levy.
GIL Mauritius Holding Ltd Vs Director of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19216 (HC-UTTARAKHAND) · Section 234B
-
HC - Revised returns filed by assessee companies pursuant to NCLT approved amalgamation beyond the prescribed time limit u/s. 139(5) are valid.
Dalmia Power Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax Circle 1
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19215 (HC-MADRAS) · Section 139(5)
-
ITAT - Accommodation entries - Presumption of Section 132(4A) stood against the assessee and complete onus to negate the same was on assessee which has remain undischarged - Addition justified.
RAJENDRA P. JAIN VERSUS DCIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 (3), MUMBAI
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19214 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=74995&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - Unless in the order u/s 147 the AO makes addition on the ‘foundational’ issue for which the reason was recorded, the AO is not permitted to make addition in respect of ‘any other issue’ for which reason was not recorded prior to issue of the notice.
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-12 (1) , KOLKATA VERSUS M/S. DOTEX MERCHANDISE PVT. LTD. AND (VICE-VERSA)
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19213 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=74996&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Information is not synonymous to truth - AO simply on the basis of the investigation report of DIT (Inv.) has jumped into conclusion that there is an escapement of income which is erroneous since it does not satisfy the jurisdictional fact and law for reopening as envisaged u/s. 147.
SHRI UDIT KUMAR DUGAR VERSUS INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-36 (4), KOLKATA
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19212 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=74997&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - AO had made the enquiry or verification as required in the facts of the case to ascertain the applicability of section 2(22)(e) - Revision u/s 263 not valid.
M/S. MANIPUR TEA CO. PVT. LIMITED VERSUS PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19211 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=74998&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Since assessee revised income voluntarily before he was confronted with the incorrect claim as original declaration of income suffered from a bonafide unintended error, no penalty u/s 271(1)(c).
THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-18 VERSUS M/S. PADMINI TRUST
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19210 (HC-BOMBAY) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=78591&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Grandfathering clause under amended India-Mauritius DTAA provides that the gain arising from sale of shares in an Indian Co. acquired on or before 31.3.2017, could not be taxed in India - AO's Sec. 197 order denying 'Nil' withholding tax certificate to assessee quashed.
Indostar Capital Vs Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19209 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 197
-
HC - Exemption u/s 54F would be available on transfer of residential unit in Co-operative Housing Society which is constructed on a leased land.
Shri Rahul Uday Tuljapurkar Vs Shri Rahul Uday Tuljapurkar
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19208 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section.54F
-
ITAT - Export commission paid to the non-residents for procuring orders as well as to coordinate and check the quality of goods constitutes FTS u/s 9(1)(vii) - Sec.40(a)(i) disallowance for TDS default upheld.
Hical Infra Pvt. Ltd Vs The Income Tax Officer
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19207 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
-
HC - Reassessment u/s 147 - Return filed by the petitioner was not taken up for scrutiny initially, and only an intimation under Section 143(1) has been issued, it is of the view that the assumption of jurisdiction in this case cannot be faulted, particularly since the respondent has, in the reasons for re-opening, cited tangible material upon which he rests his belief of escapement of income.
MR. DHIRAJ BHANSALI PARTNER, M/S. SHA RIKHABDAS MADAJI & CO VERSUS INCOME-TAX OFFICER, NON-CORPORATE WARD 6 (3), CHENNAI
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19206 (HC-MADRAS) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=78579&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Re-assessment u/s 147 -Assessing Authority cannot have a mere re-appreciation of the same facts or a review of existing material on a mere change of opinion and take a different view of the matter and he is not permitted to undertake the re-assessment proceedings. - limitation of 4 years is a protection of whimsical and arbitrary re-assessment proceedings.
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VERSUS VISVAS PROMOTERS (P) LTD.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19205 (HC-MADRAS) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=78580&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.