Delhi High CourtAmount Paid For Obtaining Mining Rights In E-Auctions Can't Be Construed As Income; Delhi High Court Quashes Reassessment OrderCase Title: Vedanta Limited Versus ACITCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 917The Delhi High Court has quashed the reassessment order and held that the amount paid for obtaining mining rights in e-auctions cannot be construed as income.Section 80-IA(7)...
Delhi High Court
Case Title: Vedanta Limited Versus ACIT
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 917
The Delhi High Court has quashed the reassessment order and held that the amount paid for obtaining mining rights in e-auctions cannot be construed as income.
Case Title: Shree Bhavani Power Projects Pvt. Ltd. Versus ITO
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 918
The Delhi High Court has held that the deduction under Section 80-IA(7) of the Income Tax Act cannot be denied for the mere failure of the assessee to digitally file an audit report.
Word 'Approved' By PCCIT For Reopening Of Assessment Not Enough, Reasons Necessary, Delhi High Court
Case Title: SBC Minerals Pvt. Ltd. Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 920
The Delhi High Court has held that mere appending of the word “approved” by the PCCIT while granting approval under Section 151 of the Income Tax Act to the reopening under Section 148 is not enough.
AO Ought To Grant TDS Credit In Compliance Of ITAT's Directions: Delhi High Court
Case Title: ESS Singapore Branch Versus DCIT
The Delhi High Court has held that the Assessing Officer (AO) ought to grant TDS credit in compliance with the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal's (ITAT's) directions.
Bombay High Court
Case Title: Hemant Mahipatray Shah and another vs Anand Upadhyay and another
The Bombay High Court has quashed the issuance of process served on the directors of the company, M/s. Hubtown Ltd., for offenses punishable under sections 276B and 278B of the Income Tax Act for delay in depositing the TDS as the TDS deducted by the company had already been deposited with interest as provided under section 201(1A).
Income Declaration Scheme 2016, Assessee Deposited Amount, Dept. Claim Erroneous; Bombay High Court
Case Title: Arihant Developers Versus Principal Commissioner of Income Tax
The Bombay High Court has directed the department to issue certificates as the assessee deposited all amounts under the Income Declaration Scheme, 2016 (IDS).
Bombay High Court Imposes Fine On JAO & Chief Commissioner For Disregarding Binding Judgement
Case Title: Samp Furniture Pvt. Ltd. Versus Income Tax Officer
The Bombay High Court has imposed a fine of Rs. 25000/- on the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) for disregarding the binding judgment passed in the case of Hexaware Technologies Limited vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & 4 Ors., in which it was held that under the faceless assessment scheme introduced by Section 151A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) has exclusive jurisdiction to issue reassessment notices.
Madras High Court
Case Title: Nishithkumar Mukeshkumar Mehta vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 318
While pointing out that the payment by FPS was not made towards the ESOPs as the Assessee continues to hold the ESOP (Employee Stock Option Purchase) even after the receipt of the compensation, the Madras High Court held the receipt in hands of Assessee qualifies as perquisite and taxable under the head 'Salaries'.
Kerala High Court
Applications For Condonation Of Delay, Should Not Be Too Hyper-Technical: Kerala High Court
Case Title: Mary Queens Mission Hospital Versus The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption)
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 537
The Kerala High Court has held that the applications for condonation of delay should have been considered without being too hyper-technical and in a judicious manner.
Jharkhand High Court
Case Title: Narendar Singh @ Narendra Singh vs Union of India
LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 140
The Jharkhand High Court has quashed the criminal proceedings against a man accused of tax evasion under the Income Tax Act, 1961. The case involved allegations that the petitioner, a tractor dealer, failed to pay the tax liability associated with his income tax returns for the assessment year 2011-12, despite declaring the amount in his filing.
Punjab & Haryana High Court
Case Title: PCIT vs Osram India
The Punjab & Haryana High Court held that Revenue Department must establish compelling reasons for taking departure from the comparables selected by him in previous assessment years if he opts so, while carrying out transfer pricing adjustment to the international transactions of the assessee.