-
S. 69C Bogus purchases: If the AO has not rejected the books of accounts and has only doubted the genuineness of the suppliers but not the genuineness of the purchases and if the payments are made by account payee cheques, s. 69C is not attracted. S. 69C cannot be applied where all purchase and sales transactions are part of regular books of accounts. The basic precondition for invoking s. 69C is that the expenditure incurred by the assessee should be out of books of accounts
M/s. Fancy Wear vs. ITO
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13630 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section. 69C
-
S. 45(5): Enhanced compensation and interest thereon under an interim order passed by the High Court in pending appeals relating to land acquisition matter are liable to be assessed for income tax in the year in which it has been received
CIT. vs. Chet Ram (HUF)
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13629 (SC) · Section. 45(5)
-
S. 132: The plea that the search proceedings initiated u/s 132 are invalid and that the block assessment proceedings are without jurisdiction cannot be entertained because s. 132A provides that the 'reason to believe' or 'reason to suspect', as the case may be, shall not be disclosed to any person or any authority or the Appellate Tribunal as recorded by Income Tax Authority u/s 132 or 132A
M/s N. K. Jewellers vs. CIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13628 (SC) · Section. 132
-
SC - The person who has received enhanced compensation and interest thereon even by an interim order passed by the Court would be assessed to tax for that enhanced compensation.
Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Chet Ram (HUF)
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13627 (SC) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=70011&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - AO cannot generally say in respect of prior permission request u/s Sec. 281(1) that no proposed transaction or charge over any asset, though unencumbered, can be permitted because there is a possibility of another demand, or on account of the vagaries of litigation, etc.
Vedanta Ltd. vs. ACIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13623 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section. 281
-
ITAT - ‘Signature bonus’ received for demitting of rights in the oil fields is a non-taxable capital receipt.
Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. vs. DCIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13622 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
S. 69C "On Money": If the unaccounted expenditure incurred is from the 'on money' received by the assessee, then, the question of making any addition u/s 69C does not arise because the source of the expenditure is duly explained. It is only the 'on money' which can be considered for the purpose of taxation. Once the 'on money' is considered as a revenue receipt, then any expenditure out of such money cannot be treated as unexplained expenditure, for that would amount to double addition in respect of the same amount
CIT. vs. M/s Golani Brothers
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13621 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section. 69C
-
Search assessment u/s 153C: Proceedings u/s 153C of the Act can be initiated against a person only if the seized materials "belongs" to that person. It is not sufficient for the Revenue to urge that the seized document "pertains" to the person. Sinhgad Technical Education Society [2017] 84 Taxmann.com 290 (SC) followed
CIT. vs. Renu Constructions Pvt. Ltd.
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13620 (HC-DELHI) · Section. 153C
-
S. 195 TDS: Entire law explained on whether payment of commission to non-resident agents for services rendered outside India is liable to tax in India u/s 5(2)(b) and 9(1)(i) on the ground that the "source" of the payment is in India and that the insertion of the Explanation to s. 9(2) with retrospective effect by the Finance Act 2010 makes such payments taxable
Divya Creation vs. ACIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13619 (HC-DELHI) · Section 195
-
SC - Receipt of enhanced compensation and interest thereon under an interim order passed by the High Court in pending appeals relating to land acquisition matter, would be assessed to tax for that enhanced compensation.
Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Chet Ram (HUF)
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13618 (SC) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=70011&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Any entry found on loose papers ("bahi") in the premises of the third party without any corroborative evidence, would not be made basis for addition.
Cosmos Infra Engineering (India) Ltd. Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13617 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=57970&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - The moment a favourable order is passed by SC pursuant to which amount is deposited with the Court Registry, the amount became assessable to tax in assessee’s hands. Sec. 234C interest applicable.
Canbank Financial Services Ltd. vs. CCIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13616 (HC-KARNATAKA) · Section. 234C
-
ITAT - Exemption u/s 11 cannot be denied in toto with regard to the voluntary donations received by the assessee. Only donations, which are not voluntary can be disallowed.
Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (E), Hyderabad Versus M/s. Vignana Jyothi And M/s. Vignana Jyothi Versus Asstt. Director of Income Tax (Exemptions) - III Hyderabad
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13615 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=58043&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Where account appeared to be in the nature of current adjustment accommodation account and there was movement of funds in both ways on need basis, amount cannot be regarded as deemed dividend u/s. 2(22)(e).
Ravindra R Fotedar Versus ACIT 10 (2), Mumbai
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13614 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=58041&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - There is no sufficient reason to deviate from the appellate orders of the CIT(A) of the earlier years allowing the exemption u/s. 11(1) and accordingly, the AO was directed to allow the exemption u/s. 11(1).
DCIT (E), CIRCLE 2 (1), New Delhi Versus PHD Chamber of Commerce And Industry
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13613 (ITAT-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=58040&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
SC - As per Finance Act, 2017 amendment to Sec. 132A, the Income Tax Authority shall not disclose the 'reason to believe' or 'reason to suspect', as recorded u/s. 132/132A, to any person or any authority. Block assessment upheld.
N. K. Jewellers vs. CIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13612 (SC)
-
HC - Not correct to hold that Sec. 153(2A) limitation applied only where there was complete setting aside of assessment and not when the proceedings were remanded to AO with directions from ITAT and covered only few issues.
Nokia India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13611 (HC-DELHI) · Section. 153(2A)
-
ITAT - Even if there is delay in filing return u/s 148, Sec. 54F exemption cannot be denied.
Amina Ismil Rangari vs. ITO
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13610 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section. 148
-
SC - Enhanced compensation alongwith interest received by assessee-HUF pursuant to HC’s interim order in pending appeals, is taxable in the year of receipt.
Chet Ram (HUF) vs. CIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13609 (SC)
-
S. 271(1)(c) penalty: Voluntary disclosure of Rs. 557.50 crores. Entire law on levy of penalty discussed in the context of declaration made during survey, bogus purchases, bogus share capital, accommodation entries, non-application of mind by the AO etc. All important judgements incl Kaushalya 216 ITR 660 (Bom), MAK Data 358 ITR 593 (SC) explained/ ditinguished
Uttam Value Steels Limited vs. ACIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13608 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section. 271(1)(c)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.