-
Before recovery in respect of the dues from a private company can be initiated against the directors, to make them jointly and severally liable for such dues, it is necessary for the Revenue to establish that such recovery cannot be made against the company and then alone it can reach to the directors who were responsible for the conduct of the business during the previous year in relation to which liability exists.
ASHITA NILESH PATEL VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 4 (1) (2)
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20976 (HC-GUJARAT) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82032&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
It cannot be said that there was no full and true disclosure at the end of the assessee of the material facts. In such circumstances, it could be said that there was no tangible material with the Assessing Officer for the purpose of reopening the assessment except the change of opinion that the deductions could not have been claimed and allowed under Sections 53(b) and 54(1)(i) of the Act.
ARUN MUNSHAW HUF VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 7 (1)
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20954 (HC-GUJARAT) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81993&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
As the assessee was holding more than 10% of the shares in both the companies, the provisions of Section 2(22)(e) of the Act would come into play. However, the section further provides that the dividend does not include any advances or loan made to a share holder by the Company in the ordinary course of business where lending of money is a substantial part of the business of the Company.
THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 4 VERSUS MOHAN BHAGWATPRASAD AGRAWAL
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20937 (HC-GUJARAT) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81952&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Before recovery in respect of the dues from a private company can be initiated against the directors, to make them jointly and severally liable for such dues, it is necessary for the Revenue to establish that such recovery cannot be made against the company and then alone it can reach to the directors who were responsible for the conduct of the business during the previous year in relation to which liability exists.
SONAL NIMISH PATEL VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 4 (1) (2)
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20915 (HC-GUJARAT) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81934&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Merely because the respondent assessee has disclosed additional income of ₹ 12 Crore during the course of settlement, it cannot be said that Commission has not followed the procedure prescribed under the Act of 1961. On perusal of the impugned order passed by the Commission, it is apparent that the application submitted by the respondent has been dealt with as per the provisions of section 245C and 245D of the Act.
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX SURAT 1 VERSUS SHANKARLAL NEBHUMAL UTTAMCHANDANI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20895 (HC-GUJARAT) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81916&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
If the applicant is directed to abide by the provisions of Sec.139AA and subsequently the petition challenging the validity of Aadhar Act succeeds, it would not be possible to turn the clock back as the applicant would be required to provide all the necessary information for obtaining an Aadhaar card and the claim of privacy of the applicant would be lost for all times to come.
Bandish Saurabh Soparkar Vs Union of India
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20882 (HC-GUJARAT)
-
Pursuant to interim order passed by this court, the applicant has already filed the return of income for AY 2017-18, however, during the pendency of this petition, the validity of section 139AA of the Act has been upheld by the Supreme Court in Justice K.S. Puttuswamy's case. The challenge to the constitutional validity of section 139AA of the Act must therefore, necessarily fail.
BANDISH SAURABH SOPARKAR VERSUS UNION OF INDIA
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20850 (HC-GUJARAT) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81848&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
As decided in Rajkot District Co-op. Bank Ltd. The instructions clearly provide for amortisation of premium paid on acquisition of securities when the same are acquired at the rate higher than the face value. Such amortisation would have to be for the remaining period of maturity.
THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 VERSUS THE KALUPUR COMMERCIAL CO-OP BANK LTD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20849 (HC-GUJARAT) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81850&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The finality clause contained in section 245-I of the IT Act does not and cannot bar the jurisdiction of the High Court under article 226 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, it is not possible to state that this petition under articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is not maintainable.
INCOME TAX SETTLEMENT COMMISSION Vs PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20799 (HC-GUJARAT)
-
Irrespective of the nature of the activities of the BCCI (commercial or charitable), what is pertinent for the purpose of determining the nature of the activities of the assessees, is the object and the activities of the assessees and not that of the BCCI. The nature of the activities of the assessee cannot take its colour from the nature of the activities of the donor.
Gujarat Cricket Association Vs Director Of Income Tax (Exemption)
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20320 (HC-GUJARAT) · Section 11
-
In the case on hand, the raw material is first sent to the shearing department. The shearing machine is set for the desired size and the laminates are cut into the specified sizes as required by the customer. The laminates are, thereafter, checked for the oxidation effect. A thorough surface clearing is done to remove the oxidation. The Quality Control Department, thereafter, would verify the quality parameters like the thickness of the material, thickness of copper using Alco Meter etc.
THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VADODARA 1 VERSUS M/S FINE LINE CIRCUITS COMPANY
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20309 (HC-GUJARAT) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=80251&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
If instead of making a high pitched assessment the AO, in his wisdom, has thought it fit to get the material verified by an accountant, no fault can be found in the action of the Assessing Officer in referring the matter for special audit under sub-section (2A) of section 142 of the Act.
TEHMUL BURJOR SETHNA Vs ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1)
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20068 (HC-GUJARAT)
-
The case on hand is not falling under clause (a) of subsection (2) of Section 159 of the Act, and in such circumstances, the proceedings pursuant to the notice under Section 148 of the Act issued to a dead person cannot be continued against the legal representatives. We are not impressed by the submissions canvassed on behalf of the Revenue that the writ-applicant having participated in the proceedings cannot turn around and submit that the proceedings cannot continue as the notice was issued to a dead person.
URMILABEN ANIRUDHHASINHJI JADEJA VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 7 (1) (3)
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20042 (HC-GUJARAT) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79833&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
S. 147/148/292B: The officer recording the reasons u/s 148(2) for reopening the assessment & the officer issuing notice u/s 148(1) has to be the same person. If the reasons are recorded by the DCIT but the notice is issued by the ITO, the reassessment proceedings are invalid. The s. 148 notice is a jurisdictional notice. Any inherent defect therein cannot be cured u/s 292B. The fact that the assessee participated in the proceedings is irrelevant
Pankajbhai Jaysukhlal Shah vs. ACIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20033 (HC-GUJARAT) · Sections 147, 148, 292B
-
From the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment, it is clear that the A.O. wish to verify the transaction with respect to the information received by the department. It is well settled through serious of judgements of this Court that re-assessment even if in case where return was not scrutinized before the income chargeable to tax has escaped before acceptance originally cannot restore unless the A.O. has reason to believe that the income chargeable to tax has escaped. In other-words, for mere verification or for fishing inquiry, reopening of assessment is not permissible.
MRIDULLA BADARMAL JAIN VERSUS THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20014 (HC-GUJARAT) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79796&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
No error has been committed by the tribunal in allowing the appeals and remanding the matters to the A.O. The tribunal has recorded reasons in para 7, 8 and 9 of the order, as reproduced herein above, for remanding the matters to the A.O. So far as the contention raised by the learned counsel for the respective assessee. The said evidence was rightly not considered by the A.O., Commissioner and the tribunal. The impugned orders passed by the tribunal in remanding the matter does not require any interference at the hands of this Court. No substantial question of law arise in both these appeals for consideration of this Court.
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2, VADODARA VERSUS RITAL R. PATEL
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19955 (HC-GUJARAT) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79735&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The phrase order giving rise to a demand in Rule 68B to the Second Schedule of the Act should be read as the assessment order under Section 143(3) of the Act and not merely an acknowledgment or an intimation under Section 143(1) of the Act.
Gauravbhai Hargovindhai Dave Vs TAX RECOVERY OFFICER 4
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19923 (HC-GUJARAT) · Section 143(1)
-
Provision requires an employer before paying the employee his wages to deduct the employee's contribution along with the employer's own contribution as fixed by the Government.
M/S RMP BEARING LTD. THRU. RAJENDRA C. MAKWANA VERSUS DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 3 (1) (2)
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19884 (HC-GUJARAT) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79610&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The AO has power to reopen the assessment, provided there is “tangible material” to come to the conclusion that there is escapement of income from assessment and the reasons must have a live link with the formation of belief.
NILAMBEN SANDIPBHAI PARIKH VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 4 (2)
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19863 (HC-GUJARAT) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79602&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Tribunal relying upon the Circular No.21/2015 dated 10th December 2015 dismissed the appeal on the ground of low tax effect without going into the merits of the matter.
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIOER OF INCOME TAX-2 VERSUS M/S KUNJ INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19854 (HC-GUJARAT) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79549&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.