-
Reopening of assessment based on all the primary fact which were available at the time of original assessment with a view to take another view is a case of change of opinion and the same is prohibited
Trent Ltd Vs The Deputy Commisioner of Income Tax-2(3)
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28160 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
Petitioner failed to disprove Respondents’ plea that the LOC was extended from time to time and was in existence on Feb 22, 2021 when the new OM with its guidelines came into effect. Therefore LOC is liable to be quashed.
Vikas Chaudhary Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28159 (HC-DELHI)
-
Assessee has incurred expenses not only on account of social responsibility, but also keeping in mind the goodwill and benefit it would yield in the long run in earning profit. Hence this expenditure would be in the realm of business expenditure.
M/S. KUMARASWAMY MINERAL EXPORTS PVT. LTD., [FOR AND ON BEHALF OF ERSTWHILE PARTNERSHIP FIRM M/S. KUMARASWAMY MINERAL EXPORTS] VS. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28158 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=94971&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Where an assessment has been only processed under Section 143(1) of the Act, the reopening notice must satisfy the test of having reason to believe that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment.
INDERJEET KOHLI VERSUS DCIT CIRCLE – 38 (1) NEW DELHI
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28157 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=94976&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Where interest paid on overdraft account maintained with bank for purpose of business and all receipts are deposited in the overdraft account and all payments including taxes made from that account, the entire interest paid would be allowable deduction.
SHRI DHARAM BHUSHAN JAIN VERSUS THE ACIT, CIRCLE – 61 (1) NEW DELHI
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28156 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=94978&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Circular No.14 of 2001 clarified that the restriction of 8 years for carry forward and set off of unabsorbed depreciation had been dispensed with.
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI. VERSUS M/S. DCM HYUNDAI LIMITED
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28155 (HC-MADRAS) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=86328&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The jurisdictional conditions are not satisfied before the issuance of notice under Section 148
THE GREAT EASTERN SHIPPING CO. LTD. VERSUS NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE/NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE & ORS.
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28154 (HC-BOMBAY) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=86333&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
If the Assessing Officer has to record the consideration bestowed by him on all issues raised during the assessment proceedings even where he is satisfied, then it would be impossible for the Assessing Officer to complete all the assessments which are required to be scrutinized by him under section 143 (3).
PREETHI KITCHEN APPLIANCES PRIVATE LTD. VERSUS THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 10 (3) (2) , MUMBAI
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28153 (HC-BOMBAY) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=86334&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The AO made a false statement that the assessee’s submissions and objections were carefully considered and dealt with whereas they were not dealt with.
Sharvah Multitrade Company Private Limited Vs Income Tax Oficer
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28152 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
Where noticee seeks cross-examination, denial thereof would be violation of principles of natural justice.
Marg Realities Limited Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28151 (HC-MADRAS)
-
Merely giving license to the developer could not be said to be the possession within the meaning of Section 53A of TPA and the developer has to get the control over the land and not actual physical occupation of land.
NG Balu Reddy, HUF Vs The Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28150 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
-
The mere fact that payments have been received through cheque cannot give any credence so as to genuineness of the transactions.
Krishna Devi Vs Income Tax Officer
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28149 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
We uphold the order of the ld. CIT(A), as we do not find merit in the appeal filed by the assessee.
M/S. ARUN SHINDE VERSUS ITO, WARD-3 (3) , PUNE
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28148 (ITAT-PUNE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=94956&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Impugned Notice u/s 148 are wholly without jurisdiction, illegal, arbitrary, and liable to be quashed.
SHARVAH MULTITRADE COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4 (3) (1) & ANR.
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28147 (HC-BOMBAY) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=86314&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Where on consideration of material on record, one view is conclusively taken by the AO it would not be open to reopen the assessment based on the very same material with a view to take another view.
RAVI KANAIYALAL SHETH VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 5 (3) (1) & ORS.
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28146 (HC-BOMBAY) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=86315&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
We are satisfied that petitioner had truly and fully disclosed all material facts necessary for the purpose of assessment.
VODAFONE IDEA LTD. (SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST OF M/S. IDEA CELLULAR LTD.) VERSUS THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5, UNION OF INDIA
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28145 (HC-BOMBAY) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=86317&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Using the words 'failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts', is clearly made only as an attempt to take the case out of the restrictions imposed by the proviso (1) to section 147 of the Act.
BENNETT PROPERTY HOLDINGS COMPANY LTD. VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 (1) (1) AND TWO ORS.
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28144 (HC-BOMBAY) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=86318&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
It is not even prima facie the case of the Assessing Officer that there was failure on part of petitioner to fully and truly disclose all material facts, this Court has to interfere by exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
STCI FINANCE LTD. VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 (3) (1) , MUMBAI AND ANR.
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28143 (HC-BOMBAY) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=86320&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Increase in the sales resulting into the higher profit could not be the reasons to hold the expenditure to be of capital nature.
Omni Active Health Technologies Ltd Vs Dy. Commi ssione r of Income Tax
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28142 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Even the participation by the Assessee in the assessment proceedings would also not make any difference because the facts remains that the assessment order has been passed by the assessing officer in the name of a nonexistent company.
Accenture Solutions Private Limited (ASOL) (As a Successor to Accenture Services Private Limited Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28141 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.