-
One of the essential conditions in Section 69A is that the Assessee should be the owner of the money and it should not be recorded in his books of accounts. This was a pre-condition to the next step of the Assessee offering no explanation about the nature and source of the acquisition of such money.
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI VERSUS ANOOP JAIN
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19928 (HC-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79696&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
While it is true that the demand u/s. 115- QA would be in addition to the total income, the fact of the matter is that in the present case it forms an integral part of the impugned assessment order u/s. 143 (3) of the Act it is not possible for this Court to read this part of the order separate from the rest of the assessment order.
GENPACT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19924 (HC-DELHI)
-
Respondent failed to notice that u/s 115A (5) r.w.s. 115A (1) (a) there was no need for the Petitioner to file a return of income u/s 139(1). Respondent wrongly adverted to Clause (b) of Explanation 2 when this was a case of no return having been filed and the case if at all would fall under Clause (a).
M/S. NESTLE SA VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) , CIRCLE-2 (2) (2) , NEW DELHI
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19903 (HC-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79644&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Assessee has placed before the Court a detailed chart which shows dissimilarities between the Infosys BPO and the Assessee on several counts. Infosys provides business process management services to organisations over a wide range of industries whereas the Assessee is a routine captive service provider.
SYMPHONY MARKETING SOLUTIONS INDIA PVT. LTD. VERSUS PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4, NEW DELHI
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19902 (HC-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79645&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
In terms of the second proviso to Section 153 of the Act the period of extension for completing the assessment was deemed to be extended to one year and hence there was time till August, 2017 for the AO to complete the assessments.
ROHIT KUMAR GUPTA Vs PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19897 (HC-DELHI) · Section 245D(4)
-
It can straightaway be noticed that the crucial change is the substitution of the words ‘books of account or documents, seized or requisitioned belongs to or belong to a person other than the person referred to in Section 153A’ by two clauses i.e. a and b, where clause b is in the alternative and provides that ‘such books of account or documents, seized or requisitioned’ could ‘pertain’ to or contain information that ‘relates to’ a person other than a person referred to in Section 153A.
THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL-3 VERSUS M/S. DREAMCITY BUILDWELL PVT. LTD.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19892 (HC-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79631&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The transaction in question doesn't form a live link for 'reasons to believe' that assessee's income had escaped assessment.
NESTLE SA Vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19860 (HC-DELHI)
-
Once there is a clear order of setting aside of an assessment order with the requirement of the AO/TPO to undertake a fresh exercise of determining the arm’s length price, the failure to pass a draft assessment order, would violate Section 144C (1) of the Act result.
OMNIGLODE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES (INDIA) PVT. LTD. VERSUS ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19841 (HC-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79543&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Plea of the Assessee ought to have been accepted in the first instance by the AO.
M/S. P.H. KUMAR & CO. VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19836 (HC-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79522&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
This Court is not persuaded to take a view different from that of the Mumbai Bench of the ITAT ICICI Prudential Insurance Co. Ltd. v. ACIT, which has been affirmed by the Bombay High Court VERSUS ICICI PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -LTU VERSUS MAX LIFE INSURANCE CO. LTD.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19835 (HC-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79523&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The crucial element of explaining how, on the basis of such record, the AO formed the reason to believe that income had escaped assessment is missing.
PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) -1 VERSUS ANDALEEB SEHGAL
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19829 (HC-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79495&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The Court notes that after the words “data relating to the financial year” occurring in Rule 10 B (4) of the Rules , there is an insertion made in the Rules with effect from 19th October 2015, which reads “hereafter in this Rule and in Rule 10 (C) (a) referred to as the ‘current year’.
PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- 4 VERSUS M/S. GIESECKE & DEVRIENT (INDIA) PVT. LIMITED
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19817 (HC-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79488&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
CIT(A) in the order dated 1st October, 2014 held that under Section 50 (C)(3) of the Act, the value adopted for payment of stamp duty can be adopted as sale consideration only if the fair market value determined by DVO is less than the value adopted for stamp duty purposes.
PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-15 VERSUS M/S. MODERN LACE HOUSE
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19816 (HC-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79489&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT has in the impugned order noted that for AY 2004-2005 there was no material in possession of the AO other than the observation of the Revenue audit to proceed against the Assessee u/s 147 - CIT (A) noted that the case fell squarely within the realm of ‘change of opinion’ which was impermissible as a basis for re-opening of assessments after a lapse of four years.
PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AND OTHERS VERSUS M/S. SAHARA INDIA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19809 (HC-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79472&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
On a perusal of the report of the investigation which was produced before this Court, it appears prima facie that there was sufficient material to justify the reopening of the assessment in both sets of cases.
CHETAN SABHARWAL, NITIN SABHARWAL VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 28 (1)
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19808 (HC-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79473&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Assessee’s appeal was allowed by the CIT(A) by an order dated 3rd March, 2015 inter alia on the ground that before invoking Section 145, the AO had not given any opportunity to the Assessee and therefore, could not have drawn an adverse influence against it.
THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -7 VERSUS OMNIA APPLIANCES PVT. LTD.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19804 (HC-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79465&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Upon reading the reasons to believe as a whole the live link between the material in the form of the investigation report and the formation of belief that income that has escaped assessment is prima facie discernable.
CHETAN SABHARWAL Vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19800 (HC-DELHI)
-
It was obligatory on the Assessees to satisfactorily account for the creditworthiness, identity and genuineness of the transactions of the so-called providers of such cash in such huge sums.
RAJIV GUPTA Vs COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19791 (HC-DELHI)
-
S. 197/ Rule 28AA TDS: An order u/s 197 is quasi-judicial & must be supported by valid & cogent reasoning. It has to be based on objective criteria and relevant material. On facts, there is arbitrariness and non-application of mind at various levels which vitiates the certificate. The reasons do not conform to the requirement of s. 197 r. w. Rule 28 AA. The settled legal position is that orders passed by a statutory authority under "dictation" of a superior officer or anyone else is bad in law
Bently Nevada LLC vs. ITO
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19790 (HC-DELHI) · Section 197
-
Respondents have already collected over ₹ 185 crores from the Petitioner, as against the total demand raised of around ₹ 873.4 crores. The year-wise percentage of demand collected for the years 2012-13, 2016-17 and 2017-18 is over 21%.
M/S. DABUR INVEST CORP. VERSUS ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19781 (HC-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79410&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.