Delhi High Court

(→ for subcategory see right ) (for subcategory scroll Below)

Question : Can the statutory benefit under section 54 of the Income Tax Act, be denied to the assessee merely for the reason that the name of the wife was included in the property newly purchased? HIGH COURT OF DELHI passed the order on 22nd September, 2022
Question: Whether penalty imposed under section 270A is to quashed when AO as well as assessee has used the same details to arrive at different conclusions i.e. differing quantum of disallowances under section 14A of the Act. High Court of Delhi decided on this issue on May 31, 2022.
Q Validity of 148 notice when the assessment for the same assessment year has not concluded yet? IN THE DELHI HIGH COURT DCM Shriram Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT, W.P.(C) 6627/2022 & CM APPL.20136/2022 on dated 10 May, 2022
Q. What will happen when the revenue seized a documents, which is computer generated loose sheet and found during the search of third party who is neither assessee nor any authorized person of the assessee. The HIGH COURT OF DELHI in the case of PCIT vs. STC DEVELOPER PVT. LTD. Decided on Dec 15, 2021 on similar issue. Section 153C. Search & Seizure.
Section 153A, 153C, 132(4). If no incriminating material is found during search, no addition could be made in respect of the assessments that had become final. Statements recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act do not by themselves constitute incriminating material. PCIT Vs. ANAND KUMAR JAIN (HUF) & ORS. HIGH COURT OF DELHI on Feb 12, 2021. If any statement was to be construed as an incriminating material belonging to or pertaining to a person other than person searched (as referred to in Section 153A), then the only legal recourse available to the department was to proceed in terms of Section 153C of the Act by handing over the same to the AO who has jurisdiction over such person.
दिल्ली हाईकोर्ट ने 1 अगस्त 2017 को फैसला देते हुए कहा कि आयकर छापे के दौरान धारा 132 4 में लिए गए स्टेटमेंट अपने आप में incriminating material नहीं है केवल इस आधार पर ना तो assumption of jurisdiction u/s 153 A हो सकता है और ना ही कोई एडिशन किया जा सकता है.PCIT vs.BEST INFRASTRUCTURE (INDIA) PVT. LTD. & ORS. IT-CASES-208-2020
Section 153C: Delhi High Court on 09.08.2019 held that since the search took place and Notice under Section 153C prior to 1st June, 2015 and, therefore, Section 153C of the Act as it stood at the relevant time applied. Therefore, the onus was on the Revenue to show that the incriminating material/documents recovered at the time of search belongs’ to the Assessee. In other words, it is not enough for the Revenue to show that the documents either pertain’ to the Assessee or contains information that relates to’ the Assessee. Further the licence issued to the Assessee by the DTCP and the letter issued by the DTCP permitting it to transfer such licence are not incriminating material and therefore jurisdiction can not be assumed by the AO under Section 153C of the Act. PCIT vs M/S. Dreamcity Buildwell Pvt.
Rule 27 of ITAT Rules :HIGH COURT OF DELHI on May 18, 2020 hold that Not having ‎filed a cross objection, even when the appeal was preferred by the Revenue, it does not ‎mean that an inference can be drawn that the assessee had accepted the findings in part ‎of the final order, that was decided against him. Therefore, when the Revenue filed an ‎appeal before the ITAT, the assessee was entitled under law to defend the same and ‎support the order in appeal on any of the grounds decided against it. SANJAY ‎SAWHNEY vs. PCIT AY 2008-09‎
During lock down period- the AO has acted with undue haste in passing the orders under Section 201(1)(1A) of the Act.- The writ was allowed for quashing the order passed under Section 201 of the Income Tax Act, 1961- the demand notice. Immediately after the lockdown is withdrawn by the Government, a period of two weeks reckoned therefrom is granted to the petitioner to reply to the Notices to the show cause issued by the respondent.
As per the insertion of the “Explanation” to sub-section (2) of section 11, if a trust donates its entire income for a year to another charitable trust, it would still be entitled to exemption under section 11(1)(a).