Archive - August, 2022

ITAT deletes section 271C penalty in respect of EDC Amount paid to HUDA

Signature Builders Pvt. Ltd. Vs Addl. CIT (ITAT Delhi) -

In this case, AO pass order levying penalty amounting to Rs.6,62,100/- u/s 271C of Income Tax Act (being 2% of the EDC amount paid to HUDA)....

Vishwanath Builders guilty of profiteering in its project ‘Sarathya’

Mahendra Kishanlal Prajapati Vs Vishwanath Builders (NAA) -

Mahendra Kishanlal Prajapati Vs Vishwanath Builders (NAA) The Authority finds that the benefit of additional Input Tax Credit of 3.75% of the turnover has accrued to the Respondent for the project ‘Sarathya’. This benefit was required to be passed on to the recipients. Thus, Section 171 of the CGST, 2017 has been contravened b...

Delhi HC admit petition against Section 148A(d) order & grants interim relief

Logix Infratech Private Limited Vs DCIT (Delhi High Court) -

Logix Infratech Private Limited Vs DCIT (Delhi High Court) Present writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 28th July, 2022 passed under Section 148A(d) along with notice dated 28th July, 2022 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) for the assessment year 2013-14 and the proceedings initiated ...

Posted Under: Income Tax | Judiciary | All High Courts, Delhi High Court

Prohibition on institution of suits or continuation of pending suits after declaration of moratorium under IBC

Deccan Chronicle Holdings Limited Vs ACIT (ITAT Hyderabad) -

Deccan Chronicle Holdings Limited Vs ACIT (ITAT Hyderabad) Under section 13 of the Code, the adjudicating authority after admission of the application under section 7 or 9 or 10 of the IBC Code shall declare a moratorium which shall include the prohibition of the institution of suits or continuation of pending suits or proceedings against...

Posted Under: Income Tax | Judiciary | All ITAT, ITAT Hyderabad

Consequences of Non Payment of TDS/TCS & Non filing of TDS/TCS Returns

Note 1. Where the Person responsible for deducting tax, fails to do so, then he shall be deemed to be assessee in default. Note 2. As per Section 221, Penalty shall not be charged, until AO is satisfied that, default was for good and sufficient reasons. Section Nature of default Consequences 271C Fails to deduct […]...

Posted Under: Income Tax | Articles

ITAT allows reconciliation of difference between return of income & Form 26AS

Vijay Pal Jhamb Vs ITO (ITAT Chandigarh) -

Assessee deserves one more opportunity to reconcile difference between contract receipts as shown in return of income & Form No. 26AS -ITAT...

Posted Under: Income Tax | Judiciary | All ITAT, ITAT Chandigarh

Different yardsticks not allowed for same property sale transaction by co-owners

Babubhai Shantilal Solanki Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad) -

2 different yardsticks for same set of sale transaction made by co-owners not allowed. Assessee cannot be treated differently for similar transaction...

Posted Under: Income Tax | Judiciary | All ITAT, ITAT Ahmedabad