Delhi High Court held that the provisioning for Asset Reconstruction Cost qualified the prescriptions of AS 29 and the assessee was thus justified in accounting for the same. Thus, that question is answered in favour of assessee.
Karnataka High Court held that forcible recovery during course of search or investigation is contrary to law and hence liable to be refunded back. Thus, writ appeal dismissed as devoid of merit.
ITAT Hyderabad held that re-assessment under section 148 merely based on borrowed satisfaction, without any independent verification and application of mind, is invalid and liable to be quashed. Accordingly, notice u/s. 148 and consequent order quashed.
Rajasthan High Court held that initiation of proceedings under section 153C of the Income Tax Act based on WhatsApp chats with specific inputs cannot be said to be vague or hit by the strict parameters of Section 153C of the Income Tax Act.
Madras High Court held that re-opening u/s. 148 read with section 147 of the Income Tax Act not sustained as there is no failure on the part of assessee to fully and truly disclosure all the material facts. Thus, notice and order quashed.
Patna High Court held that Faceless Assessment Procedure as prescribed under section 144B of the Income Tax Act is duly followed and in course of faceless assessment at every stage approval from competent authorities have been obtained.
Madras High Court held that the provisions of Section 40A(7) of the Income Tax Act would override Section 43B of the Income Tax Act provided conditions under clauses (a) and (b) of section 40A(7) are satisfied.
There are absolutely no credible and reliable evidences to establish that entire loans in cash were from the undisclosed funds whereas loan in cheques were accepted to be that of person other assessee and his role as a conduit or a mere intermediary was established.
ITAT Delhi remanded the matter back to the file of AO to re-consider the activities of assessee trust vis-à-vis its coverage under charitable activities or General Public Utility.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that disallowance of delayed payment of employees’ contribution to EPF and ESI in terms of section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act can be made based on auditor’s observation. Accordingly, disallowance upheld.
