2023 Annual Digest Of Direct Tax Cases: Supreme Court And High Courts
Mariya Paliwala
4 Jan 2024 6:30 PM IST
Supreme Court U.P. Trade Tax Act | 'Tinted Glass' To Be Taxed As “Goods Or Wares Made Of Glass”, As it is Different from 'Plain Glass': Supreme Court Case Title: M/S Triveni Glass Limited v COMMISSIONER OF TRADE TAX, U.P. Case No.: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 896 The Supreme Court has held that 'Tinted Glass Sheet' is different from 'Plain Glass sheet' and is thus liable to be...
Supreme Court
U.P. Trade Tax Act | 'Tinted Glass' To Be Taxed As “Goods Or Wares Made Of Glass”, As it is Different from 'Plain Glass': Supreme Court
Case Title: M/S Triveni Glass Limited v COMMISSIONER OF TRADE TAX, U.P.
Case No.: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 896
The Supreme Court has held that 'Tinted Glass Sheet' is different from 'Plain Glass sheet' and is thus liable to be taxed as “goods or wares made of glass” under Entry 4 of Notification No.5784 dated 07.09.1981, issued by State Government. Accordingly, the manufacturer of Tinted Glass is liable to pay tax @15% on such goods.
Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement Cannot Be Enforced Unless Notified By Centre Under Section 90 Income Tax Act : Supreme Court
Case Title : Assessing Officer Circle (International Taxation) New Delhi v. M/s Nestle SA C.A. No. 1420/2023 + ten connected appeals
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 911
The Supreme Court has held that a Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) cannot be given effect to by a court, authority or a tribunal unless it has been notified by the Central Government under Section 90 of the Income Tax Act.
Income Tax Settlement Commission's Purpose Is To Give Assessee Chance To Disclose Undisclosed Income To Seek Immunity : Supreme Court
Case Title: SHREE NILKANTH DEVELOPERS v. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 648
A Division bench of the Supreme Court, while hearing an appeal, discussed the objective and purpose behind setting up a Settlement Commission under the Income Tax Act 1961.
Interest Income Earned On Deposits By Clubs In Banks Which Are Corporate Members Taxable; Principle Of Mutuality Not Applicable: Supreme Court
Case Title: SECUNDRABAD CLUB ETC. vs C.I.T.-V ETC.
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 660
The Supreme Court has ruled that the interest income earned on fixed deposits (FDs) made by Clubs in the banks which are members of those Clubs has to be treated like any other income from other sources within the meaning of Section 2(24) of Income Tax Act, 1961. The bench of Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Prashant Kumar Mishra said that the principle of mutuality would not apply to interest income earned on FDs made by Clubs in the banks irrespective of whether the banks are corporate members of the Club or not.
Memorandum Issued By The Government To Deduct 4% TDS Is Not Ultra Vires To Tripura Sales Tax Act: Supreme Court
Case Title: The State Of Tripura Versus Chandan Deb
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 280
The Supreme Court has held that the liability to pay the tax shall be on the transferor who transfers the right to use any goods as per proviso to Section 3(1) read with Section 2(b) and 2(g) of the Tripura Sales Tax Act (TST Act).
Section 263 Income Tax Act | Erroneous Order Of Assessing Officer Causing Prejudice To Revenue Is Revisable By CIT : Supreme Court
Case Title: The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s. Paville Projects Pvt Ltd
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 282
The Supreme Court has held that the Commissioner of Income Tax can exercise revision powers under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act over the orders of the Assessing Officer which cause prejudice to the interest of the revenue.
Mere Delay In Remittance Of TDS Doesn't Attract Penalty Under S 271C Income Tax Act: Supreme Court
Case Title: M/s US Technologies International Pvt Ltd vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 285
The Supreme Court has ruled that no penalty is leviable under Section 271C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on mere delay in remittance of the tax deducted at source (TDS) after the same has been deducted by the assessee.
Income Tax Act | For A Company To Be A "Resident" In India, Domicile Or Registration Irrelevant; Test Is Where De Facto Control Lies : Supreme Court
Case Titled: Mansarovar Commercial Pvt Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 291
The Supreme Court has ruled that under the Income Tax Act, 1961, the domicile or the registration of the company is not at all relevant, and the determinate test is the place where, the sole right to manage the company and the control of the company lies.
S. 80-IB Of Income Tax Act - Assessee Not Entitled To Deduction Under On Profit Derived From DEPB And Duty Drawback Schemes: Supreme Court
Case Title: M/s. Saraf Exports vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur-III
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 299
The Supreme Court has ruled that the assessee is not entitled to deduction under Section 80- IB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the amount received / profit derived from the Duty Entitlement Pass Book Scheme (DEPB) and the Duty Drawback Schemes.
Transfer Pricing | High Courts Not Precluded From Scrutinising ITAT's Determination Of Arm's Length Price : Supreme Court
Case Title: SAP Labs India Private Limited vs Income Tax Officer, Circle 6, Bangalore
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 328
The Supreme Court has ruled that the High Court is not precluded from considering the determination of the arm's length price determined by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), in exercise of its powers under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Exemption Of Newspaper's Income Utilised For Charity: Supreme Court Remands The Matter To AO
Case Title: PCIT Versus Servant of People Society
The Supreme Court has remanded the appeal in respect of the exemption of newspaper income used for charity.
Case Title: PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL v. ABHISAR BUILDWELL P. LTD
The Supreme Court on Thursday reserved its judgment on whether in an assessment under section 153A of the Income Tax Act, besides the incriminating material found during search, such materials which the Assessing Officer has on hand and the third party records available can be relied on to assess total income, or whether the assessment has to confined only to the incriminating material seized during the search. The Court also discussed the issue whether there is no incriminating material seized during the search, then those assessments be reopened and reassessed under Section 153A.
Case Title: K.L. Swamy v. Commissioner of Income Tax And Anr.
2023 LiveLaw (SC) 54
The Supreme Court recently held that revenue was justified in levying interest under Section 158BFA(1) of the Income Tax Act for late filing of the return for the block period even in absence of any notice under Section 158BC of the Act and for the period prior to 01.06.1999.
A Bench comprising Justice M.R. Shah and Justice C.T. Ravikumar was considering a batch of petitions dealing with the same issue.
Case Title: M/s. Muthoot Leasing And Finance Ltd. versus CIT
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 7
The Supreme Court has held that non-banking finance and leasing companies are not liable to pay tax on the interest component included in the hire-purchase instalment paid under the hire purchase agreement.
Case Title: Red Chilli International Sales Versus ITO
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 16
The Supreme Court recently set aside an order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court which dismissed a writ petition filed by an assessee against a notice issued under Section 148A of the Income Tax Act 1961 for reopening assessment.
The High Court had dismissed the writ petition on the ground of availability of alternative remedy. Taking exception to the High Court's approach, the Supreme Court observed that writ petitions have been entertained to examine whether the conditions for the issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act have been satisfied.
Case Title: Commercial Tax Officer Versus Neeraja Pipes Pvt. Ltd.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 199
Attachment orders issued by the revenue for tax arrears will not be vitiated merely because the assessment orders were not served on the assessee, if the assessee had otherwise got knowledge about the assessment orders, held by the Supreme Court recently.
Case Title: Anil Minda and Others Versus Commissioner of Income Tax
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 246
The Supreme Court has held that the date on which the Panchnama was last drawn is the starting point of the two-year limitation for completing the block assessment proceedings under the Income Tax Act 1961.
Income Tax Act | Completed/Unabated Assessments Cannot Be Reopened by AO If No Incriminating Material Is Found During Search: Supreme Court
Case Title: Principal Commissioner of Income Tax vs King Buildcon Pvt. Ltd.
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 532
The Supreme Court has reiterated that in view of the judgment of the Supreme court in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd.,2023 LiveLaw (SC) 346, an Assessing Officer (AO) cannot make additions to assessee's income in respect of completed/unabated assessments if no incriminating material has been found during the course of search under Section 132 or requisition under Section 132A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. However, the bench comprising Justices C.T. Ravikumar and Manoj Misra said that in terms of the said judgment, the completed/unabated assessments can be re-opened by the AO in exercise of powers under Sections 147/148 of the Act, subject to fulfilment of the conditions mentioned under the said provisions.
Taxation Classification | Specific Provision Will Prevail Over General Provision In A Statute : Supreme Court In 'Maize Starch' Case
Case Title: Santhosh Maize & Industries Limited vs The State of Tamil Nadu & Anr.
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 499
The Supreme Court has ruled that if in any statutory rule or statutory notification, two expressions are used - one in general words and the other in special terms – then, as per the rules of interpretation, the special terms are not meant to be included in the general expression. Alternatively, the court said that where a statute contains both a general provision as well as a specific provision, the latter must prevail.
Material Disclosed To Income Tax Settlement Commission Needn't Be Something Which Wasn't Discovered By Assessing Officer : Supreme Court
Case Title: KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED vs COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX BANGALORE AND ANR
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 822
The Supreme Court has ruled that Section 245H of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which empowers the Settlement Commission to grant immunity from prosecution and penalty to the assessee if he has co-operated with the Settlement Commission and has made “full and true disclosure of his income”, cannot be saddled with an artificial requirement that the material “disclosed” by the assessee before the Commission must be something apart from what was “discovered” by the Assessing Officer.
Delhi High Court
Delhi High Court Quashes Assessment Order Passed Before Expiry Of Time To File A Reply To The Show Cause Notice
Case Title: WONDER BRICKS Versus PCIT
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1030
The Delhi High Court has quashed the assessment order passed before the time to file a reply to the show cause notice expired.
Delhi High Court Grants Assessee An Opportunity To Adduce Evidence On Qualification, Experience, Work Profile Of Employees To Avoid Section 40A(2) Disallowance
Case Title: Mehra Jewel Palace Pvt Ltd Vs Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1031
The Delhi High Court has granted the assessee an opportunity to adduce appropriate evidence—documentary or otherwise—before the Assessing Officer in order to establish its claim regarding educational qualification, experience, work profile, and in particular the duties discharged by the concerned persons to justify the claim of the appellant or assessee qua payment of salary to the persons concerned.
IT And Admin Services By Singapore Entity To Its Affiliate In India Can't Be FTS: Delhi High Court
Case Title: The Commissioner Of Income Tax (International Taxation)-1, Delhi Versus M/S Bio-Rad Laboratories (Singapore) Pte. Ltd.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1019
The Delhi High Court has held that information technology and other administrative services provided by the respondent or assessee to its affiliate in India could be construed as fees for technical services (FTS).
Transfer Pricing Report, Appellate Authorities Can Adopt Different Method From That Adopted By Assessee: Delhi High Court
Case Title: PCIT Versus Hellmann Worldwide Logistics India Pvt.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 976
The Delhi High Court has held that the appellate authorities are not precluded from adopting a method different from that adopted by the assessee in the transfer pricing report.
Delhi High Court Upholds Sales Tax Demand Against Berger Paints On Stock Variations
Case Title: Berger Paints India Ltd Versus Commissioner Of Trade And Taxes
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 983
The Delhi High Court has upheld the sales tax demand against Berger Paints on stock variations.
Subscription Fee Received By Deloitte Exempted From Tax On Principle Of Mutuality: Delhi High Court
Case Title: CIT Versus Deloitte Touche Tohmastu
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 995
The Delhi High Court has held that subscription fees received by Deloitte are exempted from tax on the principle of mutuality.
Non-Adherence To Mandatory Requirement Of Passing Draft Assessment Order Invalidates Final Assessment Order: Delhi High Court
Case Title: Sinogas Management Pte Ltd Versus DCIT
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 996
The Delhi High Court has held that non-adherence to the mandatory requirement of passing a draft assessment order invalidates the final assessment order.
EPF Contribution Paid Next Day After National Holiday, Delhi High Court Allows Deduction As Due Fell On National Holiday
Case Title: PCIT Versus Pepsico India Holding Pvt. Ltd.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 917
The Delhi High Court has allowed the deduction for the employee's contribution towards the provident fund as the due date fell on a national holiday.
Travelling Expenses Incurred By Directors For Business Purposes And Not Personal, Delhi High Court Allows Travel Expenses
Case Title: PCIT Versus M/S. Azure Retreat Pvt Ltd
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 962
The Delhi High Court has held that the travelling expenses were incurred by the directors for business purposes of the company.
Delhi High Court Quashes Order Exempting Indian Trade Promotion Org. From Entertainment Tax On Trade Fairs
Case Title: Govt. Of NCT Of Delhi & Ors. Versus M/S Indian Trade Promotion Org. & Ors
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 937
The Delhi High Court has quashed the order of the Financial Commissioner exempting the Indian Trade Promotion Organization from entertainment tax on trade fairs.
Delhi High Court Allows Deduction To Hyatt Regency Towards Repair, Renovation, Refurbishment, Consultancy Expenses As Revenue Expenditure
Case Title: M/S Asian Hotels Ltd. Versus CIT
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 952
The Delhi High Court has allowed the income tax deduction to Hyatt Regency towards repair, renovation, refurbishment, and consultancy expenses as revenue expenditure.
Tax Authority Based In Delhi Lacks Jurisdiction On Withholding Tax Liability On Share Purchase Transaction: Delhi High Court Quashes Tax Demand Against Sumitomo
Case Title: Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group Inc. Versus CIT
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 886
The Delhi High Court has deleted the tax demand against Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group on the grounds of lack of jurisdiction.
Delhi High Court Directs VAT Dept. To Refund Rs. 6.62 Crores To Flipkart
Case Title: Flipkart India Private Limited Versus Value Added Tax Officer
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 847
The Delhi High Court has directed the Value Added Tax (VAT) department to refund Rs. 6.62 crore to Flipkart along with interest.
Delhi High Court Limits Adjustment Of Tax Refunds Against Disputed Demands At 20%
Case Title: Jindal Stainless Ltd Versus DCIT
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 796
The Delhi High Court has limited the adjustment of tax refunds against disputed demands to 20%.
Case Title: PCIT Versus Surya Agrotech Infrastructure Limited
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 808
The Delhi High Court has held that undisclosed income taxed in the hands of flagship companies cannot be again subjected to tax in the hands of assessee companies.
Overlooking Assesssee's Reply Demonstrates Non-Application Of Mind By The AO: Delhi High Court
Case Title: Aphv India Investco. Private Limited Versus ACIT
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 813
The Delhi High Court has quashed the draft assessment orders, final assessment orders, and consequential demand on the grounds that the assessing officer inadvertently overlooked the email reply of the assessee, in which the assessee disclosed vital facts pertaining to its case.
Delhi High Court Directs AWS India To Withhold 8% Payment Of The AWS USA And Deposit It With The Dept.
Case Title: Amazon Web Services India Pvt Ltd & Anr. Versus ITO
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 819
The Delhi High Court has directed that AWS India withhold 8% of payments payable or paid to AWS USA and deposit the same with the income tax department.
Brand Names Are Specie Of The Trademark: Delhi High Court Allows Depreciation
Case Title: Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -1, Chandigarh Versus M/S Kuantum Papers Ltd.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 824
The Delhi High Court has allowed the depreciation and held that the expression "trademark" under Section 32(1)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and in the appended Explanation 3(b) would clearly include brand names.
The Officer Concerned Not Authorized To Administer Oath, No Evidentiary Value: Delhi High Court
Case Title: PCIT Versus ARN Infrastructure Ltd.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 692
The Delhi High Court while upholding the ITAT's ruling held that the addition of Rs. 10 crore was made purely on the basis of the statement made by directors without corroborative evidence.
Delhi High Court Stays The Income Tax Reassessment Proceedings Initiated Against Oxfam India
Case Title: Oxfam India Versus Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 682
The Delhi High Court has stayed the income tax reassessment proceedings initiated against Oxfam India.
No TDS Deductible On Commission Payment To Non-Resident Agent Overseas: Delhi High Court
Case Title: PCIT Versus Maharani Enterprises
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 653
The Delhi High Court has held that commission payments to non-resident agents overseas are not chargeable to tax and there is no TDS required to be deducted under Section 195 of the Income Tax Act.
Depreciation Allowable On Goodwill Though No Actual Cash Payment Made For Acquisition: Delhi High Court
Case Title: PCIT Versus M/S Eltek Sgs Pvt. Ltd.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 668
The Delhi High Court has held that depreciation is allowable on goodwill arising in a scheme of amalgamation even though no actual cash payment was made for the acquisition of goodwill.
MSMED Act Would Not Be Applicable To CA Firms Appointed As 'Special Auditors' Under Section 142(2A) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961: Delhi High Court
Case Title: PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX v. MSECF and Anr, W.P.(C) 13754 of 2019
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 568
The Delhi High Court has held that the provisions of MSMED Act, 2006 would not apply to a CA firm appointed as 'Special Auditor' under Section 142(2A) of the Income Tax Act (IT Act), 1961.
Subsidy Received By Nestle India As Incentive To Establish Industrial Unit Is Capital Receipt: Delhi High Court
Case Title: Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs Nestle India Ltd
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 572
The Delhi High Court observed that the Subsidy received by Nestle India, the assessee as incentive to establish industrial unit is Capital receipt and cannot be adjusted against block of assets.
Subscription Amount Received From Subscribers Of E-Journals Cannot Be Treated As Royalty: Delhi High Court
Case Title: The Commissioner Of Income Tax Versus Springer Nature Customer Services Centre GMBH
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 597
The Delhi High Court has held that the subscription amount received from subscribers of e-journals cannot be treated as royalty.
Delhi High Court Excludes Comparable On Grounds Of Functional Dissimilarity & Amalgamation
Case Title: The Commissioner Of Income Tax -4 Versus GE India Business Services Pvt. Ltd.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 614
The Delhi High Court has held that the Software Development Services offered by TCS International could not be used as a comparable since the assessee was in the business of Indian Information technology-enabled services (ITES) or business process outsourcing (BPO).
Delhi High Court Directs Dept. To Reconsider Travelport UK's Refund Adjustment
Case Title: Travelport International Operations Limited United Kingdom Versus Commissioner Of Income Tax International Taxation 3 N.Delhi & Ors.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 506
The Delhi High Court has directed the department to reconsider Travelport UK's refund adjustment on the basis of the contents of the writ petition.
Case Title: VODAFONE MAURITIUS LIMITED Versus ACIT
The Delhi High Court has directed the AO to provide information to Vodafone Mauritius to determine the validity of the Tax Residency Certificate (TRC).
Assessment Order Cannot Be Directed Against Only One Of The Legal Heirs Of Deceased Assessee: Delhi High Court Sets Aside Rs. 10 Crores Demand
Case Title: Darpan Kohli Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 529
The Delhi High Court held that an assessment order cannot be directed against only one of the legal heirs of a deceased assessee.
AO Unclear whether The Notice Is Issued To An Individual Or A Corporate Entity: Delhi High Court Quashes Reassessment Notice
Case Title: Home Credit India B.V. Versus ACIT
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 534
The Delhi High Court has quashed the reassessment notice for non-application of mind by the department.
Case Title: OYO Hotels and Homes Private Limited vs Deputy Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 279
The Delhi High Court has set aside the Revenue Department's order withholding a refund of over Rs. 33 Crores due to OYO Hotels and Homes Pvt Ltd, while directing the department to reconsider OYO's representations seeking disbursal of the refund amount, bearing in mind the provisions of Section 241A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Case Title: Milestone Systems A/S vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 254
The Delhi High Court has set aside the Income Tax Department's order rejecting the assessee's application seeking a certificate for “NIL” rate of withholding tax under Section 197 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Income Tax Demand On OYO For 1,140 Cr: Delhi High Court Directs CIT To Give Personal Hearing
Case Title: OYO Hotels And Homes Pvt. Ltd. Versus DCIT
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 188
The Delhi High Court has directed the Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) to accord a personal hearing to OYO for the stay on the income tax demand of Rs. 1,140 crores.
Case Title: Sanjay Sudan vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 203
The Delhi High Court has ruled that the revenue department cannot adjust the withheld tax (TDS) which has not been deposited by the deductor (employer) in the Central Government Account, against the refund due and payable to the deductee/assessee.
Case Title: PC Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s Fish Poultry and Egg Marketing Committee
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 246
The Delhi High Court has ruled that the income/ fee earned by an Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee (APMC) for regulating the poultry market, would fall within the scope of Section 10(26AAB) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and thus the same would be exempt from income tax.
Delhi High Court Stays Reassessment Order Based On Internal Audit Objection
Case Title: Kum Kum Kohli Versus ACIT
The Delhi High Court has stayed the reassessment order based on an internal audit objection.
The division bench of Justice Rajiv Shadher and Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju has observed that the expression "any audit objection" was introduced only by the Finance Act, 2022, although with effect from April 1, 2012. Prior to the amendment, the expression obtained in Explanation 1(ii) appended to Section 148 referred to the "Comptroller and Auditor General of India."
Department Can't Go Behind TRC Issued By The Other Tax Jurisdictions: Delhi High Court
Case Title: Blackstone Capital Partners (Singapore) VI FDI Three Pte. Ltd. Versus ACIT
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 125
The Delhi High Court has quashed the reassessment and held that the department cannot go behind the Tax Residency Certificate (TRC) issued by the other tax jurisdiction.
The division bench of Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora has observed that the reason given for reopening the assessment, namely, to verify the nature and genuineness of the transactions of the assessee in the assessment year, was untenable in law as the return of income had been filed by the assessee within time with full particulars. The notice has been issued on borrowed satisfaction, which is impermissible in law.
Case Title: Blackstone Capital Partner Versus ACIT
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 92
The Delhi High Court has quashed the reassessment notice as the AO failed to apply his mind as to whether an investment in shares was a capital account transaction.
Case Title: Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax versus M/s Steel Authority of India Ltd.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 95
The Delhi High Court has reiterated that Explanation 2 to Section 37(1) of Income Tax Act, 1961, inserted by the Finance Act, 2014, which bars deduction of CSR expenses while computing income from business or profession, is prospective in nature.
The bench of Justices Rajiv Shakdher and Tara Vitasta Ganju remarked that deductibility of CSR expenses under Section 37(1), prior to its amendment by the Finance Act, cannot depend upon how the funds are spent by the recipient.
Case Title: Charu Chains & Jewels (P) Ltd. Versus ACIT
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 101
The Delhi High Court has held that the underlying information or material that formed the basis for triggering the assessment or reassessment proceedings was required to be furnished to the assessee.
The division bench of Justice Rajiv Shakdher and Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju has noted that the petitioner has indicated that it will file a further response once the information or material is provided, and even if the information or material is not provided, it will reserve its right to file a further response.
Assessment Order Issued Without DIN, Invalid; S. 292B Of ITA Not Applicable: Delhi High Court
Case Title: The Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) vs Brandix Mauritius Holdings Ltd
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 329
The Delhi High Court has upheld the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) where it had set aside the assessment order issued by the Income Tax Department without quoting the Document Identification Number (DIN).
Delhi High Court Upholds Constitutional Validity Of Section 115BBE Of Income Tax Act
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1352
Case Title: Triveni Enterprises Limited Versus ITO
The Delhi High Court has upheld the constitutional validity of Section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act.
Case Title: PCIT Versus Future First Info. Services Pvt. Ltd.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1301
The Delhi High Court has held that the high-end knowledge process outsourcing (KPO) services provider cannot be compared with the information technology-enabled services (ITeS), which fall under the category of BPO services provider.
No Upward Adjustment Required To Be Carried Out For Amount Received By Sony India From Its AE: Delhi High Court
Case Title: PCIT Versus M/s Sony India Pvt. Ltd
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1304
The Delhi High Court has held that no upward adjustment concerning advertising, marketing, and promotion expenses (AMP) ought to have been made as the comparables chosen by the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) had a net margin lower than that registered by the assessee, Sony India.
S. 69A Of Income Tax Act Can Only Be Invoked Where Books Of Account Are Maintained: Delhi High Court
Case Title: CIT Versus Hersh Washesher Chadha
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1305
The Delhi High Court has held that Section 69A of the Income Tax Act can only be invoked where books of account are maintained.
Bombay High Court
Bombay High Court Quashes Reassessment Against Knight Riders Sports
Case Title: Knight Riders Sports Pvt. Ltd. Versus ACIT
The Bombay High Court has quashed the reassessment against Knight Riders Sport and held that a change of opinion does not constitute justification to believe income chargeable to tax escaped assessment.
Admission Fees Paid To Club For Corporate Membership Is Exclusively For Business Purpose, It Is 'Revenue' In Nature: Bombay HC
Case Title: Swiss Re Services India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax
The Bombay High Court has held that the admission fees paid to a club towards corporate membership are wholly and exclusively for business purposes, and the same are revenue-generating in nature.
If Refund Is Legitimately Due, Mere Delay Should Not Defeat The Claim For Income Tax Refund: Bombay High Court
Case Title: Madhani Prakash Enginers JV Versus UOI
The Bombay High Court has quashed the CBDT's order rejecting the assessee's application for condonation of the 43-day delay in filing the return of income (ITR).
Bombay High Court Quashes Review Order Which Disallowed Deductions, Being Contra To Natural Justice
Case Title: Kalpataru Power Transmission Ltd. Versus State Of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court has quashed the review order against Kalpataru Power Transmission, disallowing works-contract deductions beyond Show Cause Notice (SCN).
Capital Gains Can't Be Added As Unexplained Cash Credit For Sale Of Penny Stock: Bombay High Court
Case Title: PCIT Versus Indravadan Jain, HUF
The Bombay High Court held that capital gains cannot be added as unexplained cash credit for the sale of penny stock.
AO's Duty To Adjust Brought Forward Unabsorbed Depreciation: Bombay High Court Quashes Reassessment
Case Title: Mukand Limited Versus The Union of India
The Bombay High Court, while quashing the reassessment, held that the Assessing Officer had in his possession all the primary facts and it was for him to draw a proper inference as to whether the brought forward unabsorbed depreciation should be adjusted against capital gains or profit and gains from business or profession.
Reassessment Can't Be Initiated On Grounds Of Subsequent Contradictory Ruling By AAR: Bombay High Court
Case Title: Mrs. Usha Eswar Versus Rajeshwari Menon
The Bombay High Court has held that reassessment can't be initiated on the grounds of a subsequent contradictory ruling by the Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR).
No Material Available To Conclude Income Had Escaped Assessment: Bombay HC Quashes Income Tax Notice
Case Title: Maharashtra State Power Generation Company Limited v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
The Bombay High Court has provided relief to the Maharashtra State Power Generation Company Limited by quashing the notice issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act. The court observed a lack of tangible material to support the conclusion that income had escaped assessment, thereby prohibiting any further steps by the tax authorities regarding the notice.
Bombay High Court Declares Notices And Proceedings Under Income Tax Act For Deceased Assessee As Null And Void
Cause Title: Dhirendra Bhupendra Sanghvi v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
While emphasizing that if the concerned officers followed the settled law and refrained from issuing null and void notices, it would be beneficial not only for the citizens but also for the already overburdened courts in the country, the Bombay High Court ruled that all notices and consequential proceedings under the Income Tax Act in the name of a deceased assessee were null and void.
Bombay High Court Quashes Reassessment Proceedings Initiated To Tax 'Share Premium' Of Rs. 679.32 Crores
Case Title: SLS Energy Pvt. Ltd. Versus ITO
The Bombay High Court has quashed the reassessment proceedings initiated to recover the tax share premium of Rs. 679 crores.
Income-Tax Dept. Cannot Ignore The Valid TRC Issued By The Govt.: Bombay High Court Allows DTAA-Benefits To Alibaba Singapore
Case Title: The Commissioner of Income International Taxation-1 Versus Alibaba.Com Singapore E-Commerce Private Ltd.
The Bombay High Court has granted the benefit of the India-Singapore Double Tax Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) to the e-commerce platform Alibaba Singapore.
Consideration Received By Colgate Palmolive Malaysia From It's Indian Entity For Providing Access To SAP System Is Not Royalty, Not Taxable: Bombay High Court
Case Title: Commissioner of Income Tax Versus M/s. Colgate Palmolive Marketing SDN BHD
The Bombay High Court has held that consideration received by assessee Colgate Palmolive's Malaysian arm from its Indian entity for providing access to System Analysis Program Development (SAP) system is not taxable as royalty.
Priority Of The Secured Creditor Over Govt. Dues Under SARFAESI Act, 2002: Bombay High Court
Case Title: Ronak Industries Versus Assistant Commissioner
The Bombay High Court held that priority belongs to the secured creditor in respect of the dues of the Central government, state government, or local authority under Section 26-E of the SARFAESI Act, 2002.
AO Can Make Reference To TPO Only After Selecting Case For Scrutiny Assessment: Bombay High Court
Case Title: Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Kimberly Clark Lever Private Limited
The Bombay High Court has held that the Assessing Officer (AO) can make reference to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) under Section 92CA of the Income Tax Act only after selecting the case for scrutiny assessment.
Capital Gain To Be Taxed In Singapore: Bombay High Court Allows Capital Gains Exemption To FII
Case Title: CIT Versus M/s Citicorp Investment Bank
The Bombay High Court has granted the capital gains exemption to Foreign Institutional Investors (FII).
CBDT Circular Allowing Benefit Only To Cases Where Appeals Are 'Dismissed In Limine' Is Arbitrary: Bombay High Court
Case Title: Oerlikon Balzers Coating India Versus Union of India
The Bombay High Court has quashed FAQ 61 of the circular 21/2020 dated December 4, 2020, issued by the CBDT to the extent that it restricts appeals to those dismissed in limine' on the ground that it was not only adverse to the interest of the assessee but also contrary to the object and reasons of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Viswas Act, 2020 (DTVSV-A).
Case Title: Citibank N.A. Versus S.K. Ojha
The Bombay High Court has held that there is no jurisdiction for an assessing officer to reopen an assessment if a dispute is settled under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme (KVSS).
Bombay High Court Allows BOCW Cess Refund On Supply Portion Of Contract
Case Title: GE T and D India Ltd Versus Union of India & Ors
The Bombay High Court has allowed the Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare (BOCW) Cess refund on the supply portion of the contract.
Director Proves Lack Of Control On Financial Affairs: Bombay High Court Quashes Income Tax Recovery
Case Title: Prakash B. Kamat Versus Principal Commissioner of Income-tax
The Bombay High Court has quashed the income tax recovery against the Director of a company on the grounds that the Director has sufficiently discharged the burden cast upon him in terms of Section 179(1) of the Income Tax Act.
Material Triggering Reassessment Must Be Furnished To The Assessee: Bombay High Court
Case Title: Anurag Gupta Versus ITO
The Bombay High Court has held that providing information to the assessee without furnishing the material based upon which the information is provided would render an assessee handicapped in submitting an effective reply to the show cause notice.
Case Title: Lok Developers versus Deputy Commissioner of Income tax
The Bombay High Court has set aside the proceedings initiated by the revenue authorities against the assessee for non-compliance of the reassessment notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on the ground that the notice was served on the secondary email id registered with the PAN database instead of the registered primary email id or the updated email id mentioned by the assessee in its last Return of Income.
Bombay High Court Quashes Reassessment Proceedings Against Jetair
Case Title: Jetair Pvt Ltd vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors.
The Bombay High Court has quashed the reassessment proceedings against Jetair Pvt Ltd, a group entity of Jet Airways (India) Ltd, and has set aside the notice issued by the revenue department under Section 148 of Income Tax Act, 1961 against Jetair, seeking to reopen the assessment for the relevant assessment year.
Case Title: Lakshdeep Investments & Finance Pvt. Ltd. Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax
The Bombay High Court has quashed the reassessment order on the grounds that the only reason for issuing the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act appeared to be that the Assessing Officer had come to a different opinion on the question of valuation than the one adopted by the petitioner.
Case Title: Pr. Commissioner of Income-Tax Versus Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd.
The Bombay High Court has upheld the CIT's order in deleting the addition made on account of interest expenditure as the assessee, Godrej & Boyce, had sufficient interest-free surplus funds to make the investment.
No Reason For AO To Believe Income Chargeable To Tax Escaped Assessment: Bombay High Court
Case Title: Late Bharat Jayantilal Patel Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
The Bombay High Court has held that the development agreement permitted construction on the land only as a licensee, which did not have the effect of transmitting possession in favor of the licensee as per Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act.
The division bench of Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur and Justice Kamal Khata has observed that there was neither any tangible material nor any reason for the assessing officer to believe that "any income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment,". The action of the assessing officer, therefore, would be without jurisdiction.
Absence Of Material: Bombay High Court Quashes Reassessment Proceedings
Case Title: Konark Life Spaces Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income -Tax
The Bombay High Court has quashed the reassessment proceedings as the issue of "large loans and advances" was not only raised during the scrutiny assessment but also responded to by the assessee.
The division bench of Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur and Justice Kamal Khata has observed that between the date of the order of assessment, which is sought to be reopened, and the date of the formation of the opinion, nothing new happened. There is neither new information on hand nor reference made to any new material on record.
Case Title: Abbott India Ltd versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors.
The Bombay High Court has ruled that the CBDT Circular, dated 01.08.2012, as per which the expenses incurred in granting freebies to medical practitioners is inadmissible under Section 37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, since it is prohibited by law, would not be applicable to the assessment year 2008-09.
Case Title: CLSA India Private Limited versus Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors.
The Bombay High Court has reiterated that once the revenue department is aware about the amalgamation and had knowledge regarding the non-existence of the amalgamating entity, an assessment order passed against such amalgamating entity would be void and not merely a procedural defect.
Case Title: Deepak Marda Versus The Income Tax Officer
The Bombay High Court has held that the fact that a different director of the same company disclosed the income received in a different way cannot be used as justification to reopen the assessment.
Case Title: Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Maharashtra State Warehousing Corporation
The Bombay High Court has held that the assessee cannot claim the deduction under Section 80IA(4) of the Income Tax Act in the absence of a certificate declaring the warehouse to be part of the port.
Case Title: Clear Media (India) Private Limited Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax
The Bombay High Court has quashed the Reassessment Order and held that between the date of the order of assessment sought to be reopened and the date of the formation of an opinion by the Assessing Officer, nothing new has happened. There was no new information received, nor was there any mention of new material on file.
Case Title: Footcandles Film Pvt Ltd. & Anr. versus Income Tax Officer – TDS & Ors.
The Bombay High Court has ruled that orders, instructions or directions issued by the CBDT under Section 119 or under the Explanation to Section 279 (6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, cannot put fetters on the power of income tax authorities under Section 279(2) to consider an application for compounding of offence, by prescribing a period of limitation.
The bench of Justices Dhiraj Singh Thakur and Valmiki SA Menezes, took note that Section 279 (2) of the Income Tax Act, which provides for compounding of certain offences, either before or after the institution of proceedings, does not provide any rule of limitation.
Case Title: PCIT Versus M/s Capstone Securities Analysis Pvt. Ltd.
The Bombay High Court ruled that the transfer of PAN is a result of the order transferring jurisdiction and that the PAN follows the jurisdiction rather than the other way around.
Bombay High Court Quashes Reassessment Order On Asian Paints In View Of Full Disclosure
Case Title: Asian Paints Ltd. Versus The Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax
The Bombay High Court has quashed the reassessment order as the assessee, Asian Paints, disclosed fully and truly all facts material and necessary for the assessment.
Reassessment Notice after 4 Years should have the Sanction Of PCIT: Bombay High Court
Case Title: MA Multi-Infra Development Pvt. Ltd. Versus ACIT
The Bombay High Court ruled that issuing a reassessment notice after four years is subject to the approval of the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income-tax (PCIT).
The division bench of Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur and Justice Kamal Khata has ruled that the approval for the issuance of a notice under Section 148 ought not to have been obtained from the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax but from the authority specifically mentioned under Section 151(ii) of the Income Tax Act.
Case Title: National Centre for the Performing Arts Versus Union of India
The Bombay High Court has held that failure to adjust interest paid by the National Centre for the Performing Arts (NCPA) was hyper- technical and should not come in the way of implementation of Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 ( SVLDRS).
The division bench of Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice Abhay Ahuja has observed that the object of the SVLDR Scheme should not be lost sight of, as the scheme has itself been formulated for the smooth settlement of disputes. The interpretation of the provisions should be to carry forward the object rather than to frustrate the it by giving rise to more litigation.
Capital Gain Tax, No Retrospective Applicability Of Amendment Restricting Investment In India: Bombay High Court
Case Title: Hemant Dinkar Kandlur Versus Commissioner of Income Tax
The Bombay High Court has held that the amendment restricting investment in house property in India has retrospective applicability.
Assessee Entitled To The Benefit Of VsV Act During The Pendency Of Prosecution Not Involving 'Tax Arrears': Bombay High Court
Case Title: Pragati Pre Fab India Pvt. Ltd. Versus PCIT
The Bombay High Court has directed the department to decide the application filed by the assessee in conformity with the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act 2020.
DRP Can Give Directions Only In Pending Assessment Proceedings: Bombay High Court
Case Title: Undercarriage and Tractor Parts Pvt. Ltd. Versus DRP
The Bombay High Court has held that the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) could give directions only in pending assessment proceedings.
Bombay High Court Quashes Re-Assessment Order Based On Change Of Opinion Without Any Tangible New Information
Case Title: Ashraf Chitalwala Versus DCIT
The Bombay High Court has quashed the reassessment order based on a change of opinion without surfacing any tangible new information.
Bombay High Court Directs Dept. To Refund TDS Amount Deposited By Assessee Under Protest
Case Title: Grasim Industries Ltd. Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
The Bombay High Court, while invoking the doctrine of unjust enrichment, directed the department to refund the TDS amount deposited by the assessee under protest.
Bombay High Court Quashes Reassessment Notice Issued After 3 Years Without Proper Approval
Case Title: Siemens Financial Services Pvt Ltd. Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
The Bombay High Court has quashed the reassessment notice issued after 3 years without proper approval.
AO Not Justified In Disallowing Part Of The Commission Payment To Indian Hume Pipe: Bombay High Court
Case Title: The Indian Hume Pipe Co. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Income Tax
The Bombay High Court has held that the Assessing Officer (AO) was not justified in disallowing part of the commission payment to Indian Hume Pipe.
Bombay High Court Refuses 50% Entitlement Of Beneficial Ownership In Husband's Shareholding By Portuguese Civil Code For 'Deemed Dividend' Taxability
Case Title: Dattaprasad Kamat Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax
The Bombay High Court has refused 50% entitlement to beneficial ownership in a husband's shareholding under the Portuguese Civil Code for 'deemed dividend' taxability.
Case Title: Ashok Commercial Enterprises Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Taxation
The Bombay High Court has held that a write-off of a bad debt cannot be held to be an asset under section 153A(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Case Title: Darshana Anand Damle Versus DCIT
The Bombay High Court has quashed the reassessment notice and held that the granting of a licence for the purpose of development of the flats and selling the same could not be said to be granting possession.
Madras High Court
Personal Hearing To Be Granted In All Matters Prior To Finalisation Of Assessment: Madras High Court
Case Title: SKS Builders and Promoters Versus Assistant Commissioner (ST)
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 84
The Madras High Court has held that personal hearings shall be granted in all matters prior to the finalization of assessments, except where the stand of the assessee is intended to be accepted by the department.
Case Title: Santhosh vs. The Commercial Tax Officer & Anr.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 102
The Madras High Court has quashed criminal proceedings against the guarantor of the assessee for failing to pay the tax dues of the latter to the Commercial Tax Department.
The Commercial Tax Officer (CTO) filed a private complaint before the Judicial Magistrate against the assessee as well as the petitioner, who stood as a guarantor with respect to the tax arrears of the business done by the assessee.
Madras High Court Directs FinMin, CBDT To Decide On Exempting Agricultural Cooperative Credit Societies From TDS Deduction
Case Title: Erode Mavatta Valamana Thodakka Versus .The Managing Director / Additional Registrar Erode District Central Cooperative Bank
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 213
The Madras High Court has directed the Finance Ministry and Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) to take action on exempting primary agricultural cooperative credit societies from TDS deduction on cash withdrawals received from the Central Cooperative Bank for distribution to the beneficiaries.
Cognizant Technology Challenges ITAT Order Upholding Dividend Distribution Tax Demand On Buyback Of Rs 19,000-Crore Shares Before Madras High Court
The Cognizant Technology has challenged the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT)which upheld the dividend distribution tax demand on buyback of Rs. 19,000-crore shares before Madras High Court.
Madras HC Directs Income Tax Dept. To Lift Attachment Of Pension Account Considering Age, Ailment Of Assessee
Case Title: G.K.Reddy Versus DCIT
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 327
The Madras High Court has directed the income tax department to lift the attachment of the pension account of the assessee considering his age and ailment.
[Section 220 Income Tax Act] Cannot Escape Payment Of Interest Merely Due To Wrong PAN Number In Order: Madras High Court
Case Title: G Moorthi v The Recovery Officer
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 305
The Madras High Court recently observed that PAN particulars are only one of the modes to identify an individual and merely because a wrong PAN number was given in the order by the Adjudicating officer of SEBI, a person could not escape payment of interest.
Cognizant Technology Rs. 19,000 Crore Buyback Dividend Distribution Tax Controversy: Madras High Court Stays Rs.9403.09 Crores Demand
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 409
Case Title: M/s.Cognizant Technology Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
The Madras High Court has stayed the tax demand of Rs. 9403.09 crore in the case of Cognizant Technology's Rs. 19,000 crore buyback dividend distribution tax controversy.
Empty Liquor Bottles Can't Be Included In Scrap, TCS Not Applicable: Madras High Court
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 413
Case Title: M/s.Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Ltd. Versus DCIT
The Madras High Court has held that empty liquor bottles cannot be included in scrap, and TCS is not applicable.
Dept. Failed To Produce New Or Tangible Information To Justify The Reopening Of Assessment Against IDFC: Madras High Court
Case No.: IDFC Limited Versus The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 308
The Madras High Court has quashed the reassessment proceedings against the IDFC as the department failed to produce any new or tangible information to justify the reopening of the assessment.
Uttarakhand High Court
Uttarakhand High Court Set Aside Reassessment Proceedings Initiated against Amalgamated Company As It Became Non-Existent
Case Title: Delta Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. Versus PCIT
The Uttarakhand High Court has held that PAN activation by a transferor company does not entitle revenue to issue a reassessment notice after the appointed date of amalgamation.
Karnataka High Court
Vodafone Idea Not Liable To Deduct TDS On Inter-Connectivity Usage & Bandwidth Charges: Karnataka High Court
Case Title: M/S. Vodafone Idea Limited Versus Deputy Director Of Income Tax
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 288
The Karnataka High Court has held that the assessee, Vodafone Idea, is not liable to deduct TDS on interconnectivity usage and bandwidth charges.
Case Title: Coffee Day Resorts (Msm) Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 224
The Karnataka High Court has held that a notice and assessment order passed in the name of a non-existing company is substantively illegal and is an order passed without jurisdiction.
Karnataka High Court Allows Tax Exemption On Voluntary Donation Received By Educational Institution
Case Title: Pr Commissioner Of Income-1 Tax (Exemptions) Versus M/S Rashtreeya Sikshana Samithi Trust
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 247
The Karnataka High Court has allowed a tax exemption on voluntary donations received by educational institutions.
Payroll Services By IBM Philippines Not FTS, TDS Not Liable To Be Deducted: Karnataka High Court
Case Title: Director of Income Tax Versus IBM India
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 65
The Karnataka High Court, while dismissing the appeal of the department, held that payroll services by IBM Philippines are not fees for technical services (FTS), and the TDS is not liable to be deducted.
The division bench of Justice P.S. Dinesh Kumar and Justice T.G. Shivashankare Gowda has observed that the work has been outsourced to IBM Philippines. IBM Philippines was carrying out the work described in the agreement between IBM India and P&G India. Hence, IBM Philippines was not rendering any technical service, and therefore, the income in the hands of IBM Philippines is a business income.
Case Title: M/s S P Metals Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 121
The Karnataka High Court has permitted the Superintendent of Central Tax to pass suitable orders for revocation of the cancellation of the GST registration, if the petitioner/assessee files returns.
The single bench of Justice B. M. Shyam Prasad has observed that the cancellation of GST registration was without due opportunity and was arbitrary.
Case Title: United Spirits Limited Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax
The Karnataka High Court has held that no further demand can be made for recovery of the balance amount since a fresh assessment is barred. In other words, the tax paid by the assessee must be accepted as it is, and in the event of the tax paid being in excess of the tax liability duly computed on the basis of the return furnished and the rates applicable, the excess shall be refunded to the assessee.
Calcutta High Court
Case Title: Commissioner Of Income Tax TDS, Versus ABP Private Limited
The Calcutta High Court has held that TDS is not deductible on trade discounts allowed by newspaper companies to Indian Newspaper Society (INS) accredited advertising agents.
Case Title: Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation & Transfer Pricing) versus M/s. The Timken Company
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Cal) 8
The Calcutta High Court has reiterated that consideration for advisory services cannot be treated as Fees for Included Services under Article 12(4)(b) of the India-US Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA). The Court thus upheld the ITAT's order setting aside the additions made to the foreign assessee Company's income for the compensation received by it for rendering advisory services to its Indian subsidiary.
Case Title: PCIT Versus Britannia Industries Ltd.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Cal) 3
The Calcutta High Court has held that unless and until the order passed by the Tribunal suffers from any perversity or ignores any vital fact in an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, the Court is not expected to interfere with the order.
Section 50C Cannot Be Applied On Compulsory Acquisition Of A Capital Asset: Calcutta High Court
Case Title: PCIT Versus Durgapur Projects Ltd.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Cal) 53
The Calcutta High Court has held that in cases of compulsory acquisition of a capital asset (land or building, or both), the provisions of Section 50C of the Income Tax Act cannot be applied as the question of payment of stamp duty for effecting the transfer does not arise.
AO Issued Income Tax Assessment Notice To Non-Existent Company: Calcutta High Court Imposes Cost
Case Title: Orbit Projects Private Limited Vs Income Tax Officer
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Cal) 59
The Calcutta High Court has imposed a fine of Rs. 20,000 on the assessing officer for issuing the income tax assessment notice to the non-existent company.
Calcutta High Court Quashes Income Tax Notices Issued In The Name Of Non-Existing Company
Case Title: S. K. Finserve Private Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Cal) 74
The Calcutta High Court has quashed the income tax notice issued in the name of a non-existing company, in spite of the department having notice and knowledge of the non-existence of the company.
AO Has Reduced The Procedure To An Empty Formality, To Be Deprecated: Calcutta High Court
The Calcutta High Court had quashed the Assessment Order and held that the assessing officer has reduced the procedure to an empty formality, which has to be deprecated.
No Case Of Tax Evasion Made Out As Goods Meant For Export Were Taken Back To The Factory For Repairs: Calcutta High Court
Case Title: Usha Martin Limited Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of State Tax
The Calcutta High Court has held that no case of tax evasion was made out as goods meant for export were taken back to the factory for repairs.
Calcutta High Court Dismisses Income Tax Dept's Appeal On The Ground Of Low Tax Effect
Case Title: Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-2, Kolkata -Versus- M/S. Deepak Industries Ltd.
The Calcutta High Court has dismissed the appeal filed by the Income Tax Department on the ground of low tax effects.
Calcutta High Court Upholds Constitutional Validity Of Explanation to Section 10AA(1) Inserted By Finance Act 2017
Case Title: IFGL Refractories Ltd. & Anr. Versus Union of India & Ors.
The Calcutta High Court has upheld the constitutional validity of the explanation to Section 10AA(1) of the Income Tax Act inserted by the Finance Act 2017.
Telangana High Court
Once Sanction Is Given To A Particular Authority Wilful Tax Evasion Prosecution Has To Be Launched By Him Alone: Telangana High Court
Case Title: Tirumala Tirupati Constructions India Pvt. Ltd. Versus ACIT
The Telangana High Court has overturned the assessee's wilful tax evasion prosecution before the Special Judge for Economic Offences.
Gujarat High Court
Gujarat High Court Quashes Orders Rejecting Declaration Under SVLDRS Scheme, Directs Acceptance Of Declaration
Case Title: M/s FTA HSRP Solutions Pvt. Ltd. vs Union Of India
The Gujarat High Court has rendered a verdict in favor of M/S Fta Hsrp Solutions Pvt, setting aside the rejection of their declaration filed under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 (SVLDRS). The court has directed the designated committee, Sabka Vishwas Dispute Resolution Scheme, to accept the petitioner's declaration and bring closure to the tax dispute.
Gujarat High Court Quashes Income Tax Reassessment Notices Against Non-Existent Entity
Case Title: Anokhi Realty Private Limited vs. Income Tax Officer 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 132 [Special Civil Application No. 17613 Of 2021]
Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 132
The Gujarat High Court has quashed the income tax reassessment notice against a non-existent entity.
Services Can't Be Roped Into FTS Unless Person using Services Able To Use Technology: Gujarat High Court
Case Title: Commissioner Of Income Tax (International Taxation And Transfer Pricing) Versus Star Rays
The Gujarat High Court has held that mere rendering of services cannot be roped into fees for technical service (FTS) unless the person utilising the services is able to make use of the technical knowledge, etc.
Income Tax Assessment Can't Be Reopened Without Any Foundation: Gujarat High Court
Case Title: Bimlakumari Lajpatraj Hurra Versus Income Tax Officer
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 76
The Gujarat High Court has held that when the foundation was missing, there could not have been the erection of ground to seek reopening of assessment.
Sale Consideration Out Of Transfer Of Capital Asset Is Liable To Capital Gain: Gujarat High Court
Case Title: Deepak Nitrate Versus DCIT
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 26
The Gujarat High Court has held that the detachable warrant has an existence of its own along with the debenture purchased by the assessee for a sum of Rs. 50. The realization would be a sale consideration arising out of the transfer of a capital asset and is subject to capital gain.
Case Title: Kavita Krushna Kumar v. Union of India
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 16
The Gujarat High Court recently quashed a reassessment order and final notice of assessment issued against to an assessee after she failed to produce the relevant documents, particularly Form-F prescribed under Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003 amid Covid-19 lockdown.
The division bench of Justice Sonia Gokani and Justice Sandeep N. Bhatt allowed the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution on the ground that not giving proper opportunity to the petitioner as per the law is a clear violation of principle of natural justice.
Case Title: PCIT Versus M/s. Reckitt Benckiser Healthcare India Ltd.
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 6
The Gujarat High Court has upheld the tribunal's order, by which it was held that the assessee was entitled to and eligible for deduction on export benefits on account of the refund of excise duty under Section 80IC of the Income Tax Act.
Once Assessee Shows Genuineness Of Transactions, No Additions Can Be Made: Gujarat High Court
Case Title: PCIT Versus M/s.Neotech Education Foundation
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 8
The Gujarat High Court has held that the assessee has discharged the primary onus to prove the creditworthiness of the transaction.
Reopening The Assessment Based On Change Of Opinion, Not Valid: Gujarat High Court
Case Title: Shahlon Silk Industries Pvt. Ltd. Versus ACIT
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 14
The Gujarat High Court has held that the Assessing Officer cannot have any jurisdiction to issue the notice for reopening the assessment when the assessment is sought to be reopened beyond a period of four years.
The division bench of Justice N.V. Anjaria and Justice Bhargav D. Karia has observed that there was a change of opinion by the Assessing Officer to reopen the assessment for the assessment year 2013-2014, more particularly when the issues raised in the reopening assessment were already considered during the assessment proceedings under Section 143(3) of the Act, 1961.
Failure Of Taxpayer To Disclose Fully: Gujarat High Court Refuses To Quash Reassessment
Case Title: Omni Lens Pvt. Ltd. Versus ACIT
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 14
The Gujarat High Court has refused to quash the reassessment because the taxpayer has not truly and fully disclosed the material.
The division bench of Chief Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice Ashutosh Shastri observed that if the petitioner or assessee was not remedial and has now questioned the issuance of a notice, he is required by law to cooperate with the authority in the adjudication process. When the authority ultimately passes any adverse order, the entire remedy created under the special statute is very much available to the petitioner.
Case Title: Shree Siddhi Foods Versus ACIT
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 32
The Gujarat High Court has held that the practice of not responding to the request for adjournment and thereafter taking the matter up at any time when the Assessing Officer deems it appropriate was not endorsable.
Difficult To Submit Complete Reply To The SCN In Less Than 12 Hours: Gujarat High Court Quashes Assessment Order
Case Title: Dineshkumar Chhaganbhai Nandani Versus Income Tax Officer
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 108
The Gujarat High Court quashed an assessment order made by the income tax authorities without granting the petitioner an opportunity to be heard. The court found that the show cause notice cum draft assessment order was issued with an extremely short deadline, leaving the petitioner less than 12 hours to respond.
Gujarat High Court Directs To Release Seized Gold As Outstanding Demand Against Assessee
Case Title: Praveenbhai Girdharilal Agarwal Versus Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central)
The Gujarat High Court has directed the department to release the 100.350 grams of seized gold as the assessee had no outstanding demand.
Gujarat High Court Grants Assessee Permission to Pay Tax Liability in Installments, Lifts Bank Account Attachment
Case Title: Nirajkumar Nareshkumar Lakhyani (Pro. Of M/S Om Multitrade) Vs. State Of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 115
The Gujarat High Court has overturned the decision of the Adjudicating Authority and granted permission to an assessee to fulfill their tax liability through installment payments, consequently lifting the provisional attachment of the assessee's bank account.
Excess Claim Of Depreciation By Axis Bank, Voluntary Surrendered, No Case For Penalty: Gujarat High Court
Case Title: The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 1, Ahmedabad Versus Axis Bank Ltd.
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 123
The Gujarat High Court has held that the department has failed to establish that there was concealment of particulars of the income of the assessee, Axis Bank. The department has also failed to establish that the assessee furnished inaccurate particulars of its income.
Gujarat High Court Quashes Reopening Of Assessment Order And Notice In Land Acquisition Case, Rules Compensation Not Taxable As Capital Gains
Case Title: Anilaben Rohitbhai Modi Versus Income Tax Officer
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 112
The Gujarat High Court while quashing the reopening of an assessment order and notice issued to the petitioner in a land acquisition case, has ruled that compensation received for compulsory acquisition of land is not taxable as capital gains.
Benefit Of Vera Samadhan Yojana-2019 Cannot Be Denied Due To Erroneous Payment Figure In Tax Intimation: Gujarat High Court
Case Title: Planet Automotive Pvt. Ltd. Versus State Of Gujarat
Live Law Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 152
While handing down a verdict in favor of Planet Automotive Pvt. Ltd., which had sought relief under the "Vera Samadhan Yojana-2019," a tax amnesty scheme introduced by the State of Gujarat, the Gujarat High Court, has affirmed that a minor error in the intimation should not prevent the petitioner from availing the benefits of the scheme, especially when they have met the essential criteria for eligibility.
Rajasthan High Court
Case Title: Micro Marbles Private Limited Versus Office of the Income Tax Officer
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Raj) 5
The Rajasthan High Court has held that the material referred to in the "reasons to believe" was not supplied to the assessee, and the entire proceedings for the reopening of the assessment and leading to the consequential assessment stand vitiated in law.
Sikkim High Court
Unit Undergoing Relocation, Expansion And Change Of Ownership Not Eligible Under Budgetary Support Scheme: Sikkim High Court
Case Title: Zydus Wellness Products Limited Versus Union of India
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Sik) 8
The Sikkim High Court has held that if the unit undergoes relocation, expansion, or change of ownership, it will not be eligible under the scheme of budgetary support.
Orissa High Court
Case Title: PCIT (Central) versus Narayan Kumar Khaitan
The Orissa High Court has deprecated the Income Tax Authority who, despite being informed that the assessee was in judicial custody, failed to serve a notice upon him through the Superintendent of the concerned jail, in the proceedings initiated against the assessee under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Orissa High Court Allows Deduction To The Co-operative Society Involved In The Business Of Banking
Case Title: Cuttack Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. Versus Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax
The Orissa High Court has granted the deduction to the Co-operative Society engaged in the banking business.
The division bench of Chief Justice Dr. S. Muralidhar and Justice M. S. Raman has observed that the tribunal was justified in making further classification while interpreting Section 80P(4) of the Income Tax Act by treating it to be different from the primary agriculture rural development bank/co-operative societies.
Invalid Assumption Of Jurisdiction: Orissa High Court Quashes Reassessment Notices Against Vedanta
Case Title: Vedanta Resources Ltd. Versus ACIT
The Orissa High Court has quashed the reassessment notice issued against Vedanta Resources Ltd. (VRL) on the grounds of an invalid assumption of jurisdiction.
The division bench of Chief Justice Dr. S. Muralidhar and Justice M.S. Raman observed that under Section 127(2)(a), no transfer of jurisdiction can take place without affording the Assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard in the matter.
Case Title: M/s. Unideep Food Processing (P) Ltd. Versus ITAT
The Orissa High Court has sustained the addition of unsecured loans under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Case Title: ACIT, Circle-1(2), Bhubaneswar Versus M/s. Serajuddin & Co. Kolkata
The Orissa High Court has held that the requirement of prior approval of the superior officer before an order of assessment or reassessment is passed pursuant to a search operation is a mandatory requirement of Section 153D of the Income Tax Act.
Allahabad High Court
Case Title: Rajeev Bansal Versus Union Of India
The Allahabad High Court ruled that the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 (TOLA) cannot be used to conduct the reassessment proceedings beyond March 30, 2021. The time limit outlined in Section 149(1)(b) (as amended beginning April 1, 2021) cannot be extended by the department after March 30, 2020.
Case Title: M/s Radha Fragrance versus Union of India & Ors.
The Allahabad High Court has ruled that under the garb of the protection given under Rule 138 of CGST Rules, 2017, dispensing the requirement of an E-Way bill for the movement of goods valued below Rs.50,000, a dealer who is a manufacturer, cannot be allowed to send his goods to different consignees by undervaluing the same, and without the Taxing Authorities proceeding to take action against him under Section 129 of the CGST Act.
Taxing Authorities Can't Stop Assessee From Claiming Statutory Right: Allahabad High Court
Case Title: M/S Yash Kothari Public Charitable Trust Versus State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 64
The Allahabad High Court has held that the taxing authorities cannot, in the garb of technicality, stop any assessee from claiming his statutory right, as provided under the Income Tax Act.
The bench of Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal has observed that, due to the mistake of the department or a technical glitch in the software, when an appeal of an assessee is not reflected on the portal, the department cannot deny the appeal filed offline on technical grounds.
Allahabad High Court Dismisses Challenge To Appointment Of Commissioners Of Income-Tax (Appeals)
Case Title: Shweta Punj vs. Union of India
Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 224
The Allahabad High Court has held that Sections 116 and 117 of the Income Tax Act, 1961empower the Central Government to appoint Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals). Same pay scale would not make provisions of appointment under other statues applicable to the appointment of authorities under the Act of 1961.
Correctness Of Information Available Cannot Be Gone Into Prior To Issuance Of Notice U/S 148 Income Tax Act: Allahabad High Court
Case Title: Deepak Kumar Yadav v. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 206
Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 206
The Allahabad High Court has dismissed a writ petition challenging the validity of the order under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the consequential notice under Section 148 of the Act on the grounds that the correctness of the information based on assessee's defense can be determined in the assessment proceedings under Section 148 of the Act. The scope of enquiry under Section 148A(d) is only to the extent of (un)availability of information suggesting that income has escaped assessment.
Allahabad High Court Imposes 10K Cost On Income Tax Authority For Violation Of Principles Of Natural Justice
Case Title: M/S M.L. Chains v. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax
Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 263
The Allahabad High Court on Wednesday imposed a cost of Rs. 10,000 to be paid by an erring officer of the Income Tax Department for violating the principles of natural justice while cancelling the earlier Assessment Order and initiating fresh proceedings under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Refusal To Condone Delay In ITR filing , Consideration After 20 Years, Allahabad High Court Quashes Order
Case Title: Kailash Chand Agarwal vs. Principal Commissioner [Writ Tax No. - 976 of 2022]
Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 330
The Allahabad High Court has quashed the order refusing to delay condonation in filing ITRs for lack of records after more than 20 years of filing the condonation applications.
Jharkhand High Court
Section 234B Interest Has To Be Charged On The Assessed Income And Not On The Returned Income: Jharkhand High Court
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Jha) 66
Case Title: PCIT Versus Manoj Kapoor
The Jharkhand High Court has held that interest under Section 234B of the Income Tax Act has to be charged on the assessed income and not on the returned income.
There Should Be Finality To Assessment, Can't Have Repeated Reassessment Proceeding On The Dictate Of Audit Party: Jharkhand High Court
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Jha) 67
Case Title: Rungta Mines Limited Versus State of Jharkhand
The Jharkhand High Court has held that if the assessing authority is allowed to initiate repeated re-assessment proceedings against an assessee merely on the dictate of the audit party, there would not be finality of assessment. The assessee would have a sword of Damocles hanging over it in perpetuity.
Wrong Collection Of TCS On Purchase Of Coal For Generation Of Power: Jharkhand High Court Directs Refund
Case Title: Adhunik Power & Natural Resources Ltd. Versus Central Coalfields Limited
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Jha) 59
The Jharkhand High Court has directed the Tax Collected as Source (TCS) refund wrongfully collected despite verifying purchase of coal was used for generation of power.
Wrong Collection Of TCS On Purchase Of Coal For Generation Of Power: Jharkhand High Court Directs Refund
Case Title: Adhunik Power & Natural Resources Ltd. Versus Central Coalfields Limited
Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Jha) 59
The Jharkhand High Court has directed the Tax Collected as Source (TCS) refund wrongfully collected despite verifying purchase of coal was used for the generation of power.
Income Tax Dept. Is Duty Bound To Provide All Material Information On Which Reliance Was Placed To The Assessee: Jharkhand High Court
Case Title: M/s Chotanagpur Diocesson Trust Asson. Versus UOI
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Jha) 74
The Jharkhand High Court has held that the Department is duty-bound and is mandatorily required to provide all material information or inquiry conducted on which reliance is being placed, along with supporting documents, to the petitioner as per the provisions of Section 148A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Penalty Order Set Aside Leads To Automatic Quashing Of Prosecution Under Section 276C(1) Of Income Tax Act: Jharkhand High Court
Case Title: Pralay Pal vs. The State of Jharkhand
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Jha) 41
In a significant ruling, the Jharkhand High Court has held that once a penalty order is set aside, it will be presumed that there is no concealment of income, automatically leading to the quashing of prosecution under Section 276C(1) of the Income Tax Act.
Income Tax Act | Annulled Penalty Order Implies Absence Of Concealment, S.276C Proceedings Automatically Quashed: Jharkhand High Court
Case Title: Pralay Pal vs. State of Jharkhand and Anr.
Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Jha) 34
The Jharkhand High Court has recently held that when a penalty order is set aside, it implies the absence of concealment of income, leading to the automatic quashing of criminal proceedings under Section 276C(1) of the Income Tax Act.
Jharkhand High Court Quashes Proceedings U/S 276B Against The Petitioner Who Failed To Deposit The TDS Amount
Case Title: M/s A.M. Enterprises and Anr. vs. State of Jharkhand and Anr.
Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Jha) 33
The Jharkhand High Court has quashed the criminal proceedings against a petitioner who had been facing charges under Sections 276B and 278B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner's firm had allegedly failed to deposit the Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) amount with the Income Tax Department in accordance with the provisions of the Income Tax Act.
Punjab and Haryana High Court
S. 124 of Finance Act, 2019 Not Violative of Article 14: Punjab & Haryana High Court
Case Title: M/s Schlumberger Asia Services Ltd versus Union of India & Anr.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (PH) 30
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has upheld the constitutional validity of Sections 124(2) and 130(2) of the Finance Act, 2019, which deal with the 'Vivad se Vishwas Scheme' (VSV Scheme), dismissing the contention that the said provisions were violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India since they deny refund to the assessee/ declarant even if the amount already deposited by it exceeds the amount payable under the Scheme.
Case Title: Daulat Ram Khan Versus State of Haryana
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (PH) 34
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that if Dharamshala is provided at a nominal rent for conducting marriages, it will not amount to a commercial purpose.
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Case Title: PCIT Versus M/s Great Galleon Ventures Ltd.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (MP) 34
The Madhya Pradesh High Court's Indore Bench dismissed the department's appeal, ruling that no incriminating documents were discovered during the search.
Kerala High Court
No Requirement To Have A DIN Number In Satisfaction Note Recorded By Assessing Authority: Kerala High Court Upholds Section 153C Proceedings
Case Title: M/S. South Coast Spices Exports Pvt. Ltd Versus PCIT
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 608
The Kerala High Court has upheld the proceedings under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act and noted that there is no requirement to have a DIN number in the satisfaction note recorded by the Assessing Authority.
Case Title: K.R Santhosh Versus Revenue Divisional Officer
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 268
The Kerala High Court has held that as the nature of the land of the petitioner has been permitted to be changed pursuant to the passing of a statutory order under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967, the competent authority is bound to re-assess the rate of basic tax and to make necessary entries in the Basic Tax Register after verifying the veracity and genuineness of the permission obtained.
Claim Of Deduction Under Section 80P Is Conditional On Filing A Return Within The Due Date: Kerala High Court
Case Title: M/S. Nileshwar Rangekallu Chethu Vyavasaya Thozhilali Sahakarana Sangham Versus The Commissioner Of Income Tax
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 203
The Kerala High Court has held that the pre-condition for claiming the deduction under Section 80P of the IT Act has now been made more stringent by reducing the time available to an assessee for making the claim.
Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court
Bank Not Obliged To Deduct TDS From FDR Interest To Jammu Development Authority: Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court
Case Title: PCIT Versus M/S The J&K Bank Ltd.
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has held that the assessee bank shall not be obliged to deduct TDS from the interest payments made to the Jammu Development Authority (JDA) on its amount kept in FDRs.
J&K Roads Development Agency Is Exempted From TDS Deduction On TD Account Interest: Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Case Title: The Commissioner of Income Tax v/s The Jammu and Kashmir Bank Ltd.
The Jammu & Kashmir High Court has held that the J&K State Rural Roads Development Agency (JKSRRDA) is exempt from TDS deduction on interest income accrued on Term Deposit Accounts.
Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging SCN Regarding Export Of Banned Yarn Shawls
Case Title: M/s Ali Shah through Arif Ahmad Shah Versus Union of India and others
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 166
The Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court has dismissed a writ petition challenging a show cause notice regarding the export of banned yarn shawls.
Patna High Court
Revenue Needs To Be Consistent, Can't Accept Proposition In One Case And Challenge In Another: Patna High Court
Case Title: Income Tax Officer vs. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 86
The Patna High Court has upheld the principle of consistency in taxation matters, asserting that the Revenue cannot challenge a declaration of law accepted in one case while challenging its correctness in another case without just cause.
Income Tax Act | Assessment U/S Section 153A Must Be Based On Incriminating Material Disclosed In Search: Patna High Court
Case Title: Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Satish Kumar Keshri
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 108
The Patna High Court while providing important clarifications regarding assessments conducted under , of the Income Tax Act, 1961, emphasized that such assessments must not be arbitrary and should rely on material evidence discovered during the search.
