Category Archives: Income Tax Judgments

Share sold through Stock Exchange are not Sham Transactions , no section 68 addition : ITAT

By | April 2, 2020

Share sold through Stock Exchange are not Sham Transactions The transactions were carried through Demat account and banking channel on which STT has been paid by assessee. The report of the SEBI was not adverse in nature against the assessee because name of the assessee did not appear therein for conducting dubious transaction. The report… Read More »

Tangible material required to reopen Assessment after 4 years : HC

By | April 2, 2020

  HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT Arun Munshaw HUF v. Income-tax Officer, Ward 7(1) J.B. PARDIWALA AND BHARGAV D. KARIA, JJ. R/TAX APPEAL NO. 1091 OF 2008 JANUARY  13, 2020 Mrs. Swati Soparkar and B.S. Soparkar for the Appellant. Mrs. Mauna M Bhatt for the Respondent. JUDGMENT   J.B. Pardiwala, J. – This Tax Appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for… Read More »

Deemed approval of Trust Registration if not approved in 6 months : HC

By | April 2, 2020

Deemed approval of Trust Registration The Tribunal held that once the limitation prescribed under section 12AA of the Act expired and the consequential default on the part of the CIT(E) in deciding the application would result deemed grant of registration is a settled proposition. Therefore, it has been held by the Tribunal that the judgment… Read More »

ITAT has to consider application to produce additional evidence : HC

By | April 2, 2020

Additional evidence Before ITAT HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY Braganza Construction (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-2(1), Panaji M.S. SONAK AND C.V. BHADANG, JJ. TAX APPEAL NO. 47 OF 2012 DECEMBER  6, 2019 S.R. Rivankar and Rama Rivankar, Advs. for the Appellant. Ms. Susan Linhares, Standing Counsel for the Respondent. JUDGMENT M.S. Sonak, J. – Heard Mr. Rivankar, the learned Counsel for… Read More »

SLP dismissed due to low tax effect : SC

By | April 1, 2020

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Principal Commissioner of Income-tax v. Nitrex Chemicals India Ltd. A. M. KHANWILKAR, HEMANT GUPTA AND DINESH MAHESHWARI, JJ. SLP TO APPEAL (C) NO. 13576 OF 2017 JANUARY  22, 2020 Arijit Prasad, Sr. Adv., Syed Abdul Haseeb, Adv., Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR and B.V. Balaram Das, AOR for the Petitioner. Venketesh Chaurasia, Adv. and Jay Kishor Singh, AOR for the Respondent. ORDER… Read More »

Provision for Pay Revision is allowable Business Exp :HC

By | April 1, 2020

The position in the current case is that the liability had already arisen with certainty. The committee was constituted for the purpose of wage revision. That the wages would be revised was a foregone conclusion. Merely because the making of the report and implementation thereof took time, it could not be said that there was… Read More »

Trust registration can’t be cancelled because selling milk from Gaushalas : ITAT

By | April 1, 2020

The ld. CIT (Exemptions) has passed the impugned order on the ground that the purchase and sale of milk, milk product, cattle feed etc. does not come under the object of the assessee trust. Held where there is no dispute about the activities being carried out by the assessee trust and it has maintained 11… Read More »

New claim can be filed in Return for deduction u/s 153A : HC

By | March 29, 2020

  HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Central-2 v. JSW Steel Ltd. UJJAL BHUYAN AND MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ. IT APPEAL NO. 1934 OF 2017 FEBRUARY  5, 2020 A.R. Malhotra for the Appellant. JUDGMENT Milind N. Jadhav, J. – The present appeal under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 takes exception to the order dated 28-9-2016… Read More »

No Revision u/s 263 if AO conducted required enquiry : ITAT

By | March 29, 2020

  IN THE ITAT MUMBAI BENCH ‘D’ Dena Bank v. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax – 2, Mumbai G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT APPEAL NO. 2159 (MUM.) OF 2018 [ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15] JANUARY  23, 2020 S. Ananthan and Mrs. Lalitha Rameswaran, CA’s for the Appellant. Manoj Kumar Singh and Kumar Padmapani Bora for the Respondent. ORDER G. Manjunatha, Accountant… Read More »

Forfeited advance of Real Estate Co. is allowable business Exp : HC

By | March 27, 2020

The assessee is a company which is engaged in the business of real estate. The main object of the business of the company is development of real estate. It made a payment of Rs. 3.50 crores as advance to HDIL for purchase of land to construct commercial complex for the development of real estate. Since… Read More »