February 2014 - taxcaselaw.com

Bombay H.C : Where there was considerable discrepancy in quantity of gold recorded in assessee’s books at time when ornaments were manufactured and received from artisans, as compared to gold actually exported by assessee to its foreign importers and such differential quantity of gold did not form part of assessee’s exports, it was rightly concluded that gold was subjected to local sales

Avijit Das / February 28, 2014

High Court Of Bombay Director Of Income-Tax (International Taxation) Vs. Income Tax Settlement Commissioner Section 143 Assessment Year 1989-90 Mohit […]

Section 127

Bombay H.C : Where assessee did not challenge order of transfer of its case at earliest letting all believe that such transfer was accepted, assessee should be barred from challenging same on exercise of jurisdiction by new authority

Avijit Das / February 28, 2014

High Court Of Bombay Patel Knr Jv VS. Commissioner Of Income-Tax Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2012-13 Section : 127

Delhi H.C : In terms of section 148, law only requires that information or material on which Assessing Officer records his or her satisfaction has to be communicated to assessee, without mandating disclosure of any specific document

Avijit Das / February 28, 2014

High Court Of Delhi Acorus Unitech Wireless (P.) Ltd. VS. ACIT Assessment Year : 2009-10 Section : 148, 147 S.

Section 195, Sec. 244A

S.C : An assessee is entitled to interest on refund of excess deduction or erroneous deduction of tax at source under section 195

Avijit Das / February 26, 2014

Supreme Court Of India Union Of India vs. Tata Chemicals Ltd. Assessment Year : 1997-98 Section : 195, 244A H.L.

Section 68

Punjab & Haryana H.C : the gifts as genuine from 26 parties who were merely passing on the accommodation entries not only for the assessee but for other persons also

Avijit Das / February 26, 2014

High Court Of Punjab & Haryana CIT Vs. Y.M. Singla Section : 68 Assessment Year : 2001-02 Ajay Kumar Mittal

Sec. 37(1)

Delhi H.C : The amount has been spent during the Assessment Year 2006-07, for the higher education of Sh. Dushyant Poddar, a son of its Director, was not liable as “business expenditure” under Section 37

Avijit Das / February 25, 2014

High Court Of Delhi Kostub Investment Ltd. vs. CIT Section 37(1) S. Ravindra Bhat And Rajiv Shakdher, JJ. IT Appeal

Section 263, Section 68

Tripura H.C : Where Commissioner gave a number of opportunities of being heard to assessee, revision order could not be assailed for not following principle of natural justice

Avijit Das / February 25, 2014

High Court Of Tripura Ashutosh Bandopadhyay vs. CIT Assessment Year : 2007-08 Section : 263, 68 Deepak Gupta, Cj. And

Section 80-IB

Karnataka H.C : The assessee’s claim for deduction under Section 80IB of the Act is not hit by the exception provider a in Section 80IB(2)(iii) read with Schedule 11th (Item 25) to the Income-Tax Act, as polyutherim foam used by the assessee in the manufacture of automobile seat results in commercially different product then that mentioned in the 11th Schedule

Avijit Das / February 25, 2014

High Court Of Karnataka CIT vs. Polyfex (India) (P.) Ltd. Assessment Year : 2003-04 Section : 80-IB Dilip B. Bhosale

Sec. 269SS, Section 271D

Kerala H.C : No part of the deposits were found to be not genuine and were accepted in the assessment, did not the Appellate Tribunal err in law in sustaining the order imposing penalty u/s 271D

Avijit Das / February 25, 2014

High Court Of Kerala N. S. S. Karayogam vs. CIT Assessment Year : 2010-11 Section : 269SS, 271D Dr. Manjula

Section 226, Section 220, Section 92C

Delhi H.C : Where Assessing Officer rejected stay application on recovery of tax demand and issued garnishee order on same date when stay application was rejected, though technically no fault could be found with Assessing Officer, still there was an element of impropriety in his action

Avijit Das / February 24, 2014

High Court Of Delhi Sony India (P.) Ltd. vs. ACIT Assessment Year : 2009-10 Section : 226, 92C, 220 Ravindra