-
Section 132, 153A What AO can do with item found in search is already disclosed in ITR and Balance Sheet submitted?IT-CASES-210-2020
-
क्या होगा जब किसी के यहां आयकर छापा पड़े और वहां पड़े किसी इनक्रिमिनेटिंग मैट्रियल पर आपका नाम हो? आईटीऐटी दिल्ली ने 28 अप्रैल 2020 को क्या फैसला दिया? IT-CASES-209-2020
-
Section 11 आई टी ए टी विशाखापट्टनम ने 21 सितंबर 2020 को फैसला देते हुए कहा कि जब करदाता ने सारी डिटेल और एविडेंस आयकर अधिकारी को दे दिए और आयकर अधिकारी ने कोई चेक नहीं किया। उसी डिटेल और एविडेंस की अगर कमिश्नर अपील जांच करता है तो रूल 46A कि कोई अवेहलना नहीं होती। करदाता की अपील स्वीकार की गई और माना गया की करदाता धारा 11 में छूट पाने का अधिकारी है KANDULA LAKSHUMMA MEMOIAL EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY & ANR. Vs. DCIT. ITAT VISHAKAPATNAM AY 2013-14. In Favour of Assessee.
-
Section 159. The assessment made on dead person, on the face of it, be a nullity in law. In the case in hand, we find that when the factum of death was brought to the notice of the authorities below, instead of substituting the legal heirs of the assessee in the file of the Revenue both the authorities below proceeded with and finalized the assessment against the assessee, Late Ghanshyam H Parsana, since deceased which is unlawful, arbitrary, erroneous and bad in law. LATE GHANSHYAM H PARSANA vs. ITO. Order date Aug 31, 2020. AY 2006-07. In favour of assessee. ITAT AHMEDABAD BENCH ‘C’
-
Section 148, 147:Client Code Modification is reason to suspect and not reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. Re-assessment is quashed. STRATAGEM PORTFOLIO (P.) LTD. vs. DCIT. ITAT DELHI BENCH AY 2010-11. In favour of Assessee.
-
Section 14A For the purpose of computing disallowance u/s 14A of the Act instead of taking into account total investment, only such investments which yielded exempt dividend income during the year are required to be considered for the purpose of disallowance. RELIGARE SECURITIES LTD. & ANR. vs. DCIT. In favour of Assessee. ITAT Delhi
-
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 10(13A), Rule 2A(h)‘Performance bonus’ does not form part of ‘salary’ as defined in clause (h) of Rule 2A for the purposes of section 10(13A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Sudip Rungta v. Dy. CIT held on 10 January, 2020
-
Section 28(ii)(a),28(ii)(a) SUPREME COURT OF INDIA held on Jul 22, 2020 that the payment received as non-competition fee under a negative covenant was always treated as a capital receipt till Assessment Year 2003-2004. SHIV RAJ GUPTA vs.CIT
-
Section 40(a)(ia), 194C: SUPREME COURT OF INDIA held on Jul 29, 2020 that the provisions of Section 194C were indeed applicable and the assessee-appellant was under obligation to deduct the tax at source in relation to the payments made by it for hiring the vehicles for the purpose of its business of transportation of goods. Against the assessee.SHREE CHOUDHARY TRANSPORT COMPANY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER