In favour of Revenue (Partly)

Madras H.C : This writ petition is filed for the issue of a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records relating to the petitioner on the file of the first respondent in C. No. 1742/1/89/90/Central II, dt. 20th Sept., 1989, and to quash the impugned order passed therein and consequently direct the first respondent to grant relief of waiver of interest to the petitioner for the asst. yr. 1985-86.

High Court Of Madras Coromendal Indag Products India Ltd. vs. CIT & Anr Sections 215, 217(1)(a), Rule 40 Asst. Year 1985-86, N.V. Balasubramanian, J. Writ Petn. No. 13698 of 1989 & WMP No. 19763 of 1989 31st October, 2000 Counsel Appeared P.P.S. Janarthana Raja, for the Petitioner : C.V. Rajan, for the Respondent JUDGMENT N.V. BALASUBRAMANIAN, …

Kerala H.C : Whether the amount of Rs.12,49,000/- could have been assessed as an unexplained investment, especially when there was no proposal to assess it as that under Section 69 of the Income Tax Act?

High Court Of Kerala CIT vs. Amritha Cyber Park (P) Ltd Section 69 K.Vinod Chandran & Ashok Menon, JJ. ITA.No. 294 of 2010 19th February, 2019 Counsel Appeared: Jose Joseph, SC for the Petitioner.: S.Parvathi, Amicus Curiae for the Respondent. K.VINOD CHANDRAN, J.: There was none appearing for the respondent, despite the Department having taken out …

Delhi H.C : Whether the order passed by the ITAT to the tent the same deletes the additions made by the assessing officer suffers from perversity?

High Court Of Delhi CIT vs. JRD Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. Section 68 S. Ravindra Bhat & A. K. Chawla, JJ. ITA 544/2005 12th September, 2018 Counsel Appeared: Raghavendra Singh, Advocate for the Petitioner.: M.P. Rastogi, K. N. Ahuja and Manu Giri, Advocates for the Respondent S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J. 1. The question of law, framed …

Kerala H.C : The invocation of Section 263 of IT Act is bad in law for reason of the view taken by the Assessing Officer being one of the courses permitted by law

High Court Of Kerala CIT vs. Dr. P.N. Bhaskaran Section 263, 54EA, 147 Asst. Year 1999-2000 K. Vinod Chandran & Ashok Menon, JJ. ITA No. 1622 of 2009 12th June, 2018 Counsel appeared: E.K. Nandakumar Advs. for the Petitioner.: P. Benny Thomas, K. John Mathai for the Respondent VINOD CHANDRAN, J. The only question of law …

Allahabad H.C : Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has erred in believing that the Assessing Officer has taken a view in the light of surrounding circumstances which cannot be called to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue and Commissioner of Income Tax has exercised his jurisdiction under section 263 of Income Tax Act without having sufficient material with him

High Court Of Allahabad CIT & Ors. vs. The Upper India Couper Paper Mills Co. Pvt. Limited & Ors. Section 260A, 263, 154 Asst. Year 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 Sudhir Agarwal & Virendra Kumar, JJ. Income Tax Appeal No. 24 of 2012, 25 of 2014, 120 of 2015, 121 of 2015, MISC. BENCH No. 1812 of 2014 …

Delhi H.C : Where assessee was awarded projects by Government for relocation of industries, common effluent treatment plants and development works of Industrial Complex, maintenance charges collected by assessee from allottees of plots formed part of its income

High Court Of Delhi Pr. CIT-3 Vs. Delhi State industrial Infrastructure Development Corp. Ltd. Assessment year 2008-09 Section : 4 Muralidhar And Prathiba M. Singh, JJ. IT Appeal No. 375 Of 2015 August Â 17, 2017Â ORDER Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.Â – The Revenue is in appeal against an order by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (‘ITAT’) in …

Himachal Pradesh H.C : Where prior to 1-4-1989, property of assessee was required to be assessed as per provision of rule 1BB which was then in existence, on basis of scheduled rates circulated by Government of India for bifurcating property in dispute for separate valuation

High Court Of Himachal Pradesh Commissioner of Wealth-tax vs. Bhanno Mal and Sons (HUF) Assessment Year : 1987-88 Section : 7 R.B. Misra, CJ. And Surinder Singh, J. WTR No. 1 Of 1996 And Wta Nos. 12, 13 And 14 Of 2001 December 8, 2009 JUDGMENT Surinder Singh, J. – This judgment shall answer the points …

Karnataka H.C : A cross-objection is not permitted in an appeal under section 260A

High Court Of Karnataka Smt. Jyothi Kumari vs. ACIT (Inv) Circle – 2 Section : 260A, 158BC, 147 D.V. Shylendra Kumar And N. Ananda, JJ. IT Appeal Nos. 257 & 258 Of 2001 And 277 Of 2003 February 2, 2010 JUDGMENT 1. These three sets of Income Tax Appeals under Section 260-A of the Income Tax …

Kerala H.C : Whether non-maintenance of separate accounts by assessees with regard to expenditure incurred for earning non-taxable income was justification for them to claim immunity from operation of section 14A

High Court Of Kerala CIT, Thrissur vs. Dhanalakshmy Bank Ltd. Assessment Year 2001-02 Section :14A C.N. Ramachandran Nair And K. Surendra Mohan, JJ. IT Appeal Nos. 467, 479, 720, 730, 843, 1045 And 1324 Of 2009 And 40 Of 2010 October 21, 2010 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. – The question raised in the 8 connected appeals, …

Bombay H.C : the jurisdiction under Section 263 has not been invoked properly?

High Court Of Bombay CIT-1, Mumbai vs. Hindustan Lever Ltd. Assessment Year : 1998-99 Section 80-I, 80-IA, 80HH And 263 Dr. D.Y.Chandrachud And M.S.Sanklecha, JJ. IT Appeal No.5818 Of 2010 February 1, 2012 JUDGMENT Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, J. – This appeal by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, has raised the …

taxcaselaw.com

Tag: In favour of Revenue (Partly)

Kerala H.C : Whether the amount of Rs.12,49,000/- could have been assessed as an unexplained investment, especially when there was no proposal to assess it as that under Section 69 of the Income Tax Act?

Delhi H.C : Whether the order passed by the ITAT to the tent the same deletes the additions made by the assessing officer suffers from perversity?

Kerala H.C : The invocation of Section 263 of IT Act is bad in law for reason of the view taken by the Assessing Officer being one of the courses permitted by law

Delhi H.C : Where assessee was awarded projects by Government for relocation of industries, common effluent treatment plants and development works of Industrial Complex, maintenance charges collected by assessee from allottees of plots formed part of its income

Himachal Pradesh H.C : Where prior to 1-4-1989, property of assessee was required to be assessed as per provision of rule 1BB which was then in existence, on basis of scheduled rates circulated by Government of India for bifurcating property in dispute for separate valuation

Karnataka H.C : A cross-objection is not permitted in an appeal under section 260A

Kerala H.C : Whether non-maintenance of separate accounts by assessees with regard to expenditure incurred for earning non-taxable income was justification for them to claim immunity from operation of section 14A

Bombay H.C : the jurisdiction under Section 263 has not been invoked properly?