Delhi High Court

Penalty cannot be levied in respect of an addition not having been made in quantum assessment

JRK Auto Parts (P) Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi)

In this Question arose for consideration was whether penalty under section 271(1)(c) of Income Tax Act, 1961 could be levied in respect of an addition not having been made in quantum/assessment proceedings and it was held that Imposition of penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) is strictly circumscribed to addition which has been ma...

Read More

4 year limitation period for Re-Assessment is an Exception and not the Rule

Unitech Limited Vs DCIT (Delhi High Court)

This is yet another case in the ever increasing number of cases filed before this Court challenging the issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act)....

Read More

Onus of ensuring presence of deponent cannot be shifted to assessee

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Best Infrastructure (India) Pvt. Ltd. (Delhi High Court)

S. 68: Statements recorded u/s 132 (4) do not by themselves constitute incriminating material. A copy of the statement together with the opportunity to cross-examine the deponent has to provided to the assessee. If the statement is retracted and/or if cross-examination is not provided, the statement has to be discarded. The onus of ensuri...

Read More

Lawyers & Litigants-In-Person to get info of Defects in Cases via Email

No. 460/IT/DHC (04/08/2017)

Henceforth the lawyers and litigants-in-person shall also be provided with the details of defects of their filed cases via e-mail in addition to the SMS alert already being received about the defects....

Read More

Search, Re-Assessment etc. of Non-Existent Entity is Invalid

BDR Builders & Developers Pvt. Ltd Vs ACIT (Delhi High Court)

Proceedings under Section 148 of the Act which commenced with the notice dated 3rd April, 2012 issued to VBPPL were itself void ab initio for the simple reason that on that day VBPPL was not in existence as a result of the order dated 20th February, 2013 of the High Court approving its amalgamation with the Petitioner with effect from 1st...

Read More

Reassessment for mere non submission of working sheet of deduction U/s. 10A with Form 56F is not valid

HCL Technologies Ltd Vs DCIT (Delhi High Court)

 The AO’s reason for re-opening is that along with the certificate in Form 56F, which was the certificate of the CA, the working sheet of deduction was not enclosed. That was not a requirement of law. What Form 56F has to be accompanied with is specified under the Income Tax Rules itself. The mere fact […]...

Read More

Not asked Jethmalani to use objectionable words For Jaitley: Kejriwal

Mr. Arun Jaitley Vs Mr. Arvind Keriwal & Ors. (Delhi High Court)

Extract of Reply Submitted by Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal in Delhi High Court in which he stated that  he never asked senior advocate Mr. Ram Jethmalani to pose objectionable questions to Mr. Arun Jaitley or use objectionable words while recording of evidence in the Rs. 10-crore defamation suit initiated by Mr. Arun Jaitley....

Read More

Addition cannot be made merely based on document which is silent as to payer and payee

CIT Central-3 Vs Praveen Juneja (Delhi High Court)

The ITAT noted that document was silent as to payer and payee of amount in question nor does it disclose that payment was made by cheque or cash nor it is proved that document is in handwriting of assessee or at least bears his signatures....

Read More

Assessee need not be intimated before attachment of his bank account

Gecas Services India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Income Tax Officer & Ors. (Delhi High Court)

In the present case there was no illegality committed by the Department in not issuing to the Assessee a notice under Section 226 (3) (iii) of the Act simultaneously with or prior to the notice issued to its bank under Section 226 (3) (i) of the Act for recovery of the tax demand from its account. ...

Read More

Addition cannot be made merely on the basis of a handwritten loose paper

CIT- Central-3 Vs Shri Praveen Juneja (Delhi High Court)

An addition cannot be made on the basis of a handwritten loose paper which does not indicate if it pertains to the assessee and if AO has not brought on record any forensic evidence to prove the handwriting of the assessee. An addition cannot be made on the basis of suspicion and guesswork and without bringing corroborative material on re...

Read More
Page 1 of 11512345...102030...Last »

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (3,453)
Company Law (3,347)
Custom Duty (6,579)
DGFT (3,419)
Excise Duty (4,040)
Fema / RBI (3,237)
Finance (3,415)
Income Tax (24,908)
SEBI (2,721)
Service Tax (3,278)