Delve into the crucial judgment of Orchid Infrastructure Developers Pvt Ltd Vs PCIT, where the Delhi High Court ruled against reopening assessments under Section 147/148 after a final settlement order under Section 245D(4).
In the absence of “reason to believe” recorded by the authorities, revenue authorities had hopelessly failed to bring out to recordthat the goods (here Arecanuts) imported from outside the country was without valid customs clearance.
Bombay High Court affirms ITAT’s deletion of LTCG addition on penny stock in PCIT Vs Ziauddin A Siddique case. Detailed analysis of the judgment provided.
Explore the legal battle between Razorpay Software Pvt. Ltd. and the Union of India, as Karnataka High Court examines the impugned proceedings under PMLA Act.
Delhi High Court rules in favor of Oriflame India Pvt Ltd, withdrawing TPO’s proposed income adjustments, applies TNMM over RPM. Details of the case analysis here.
Delhi High Court rules ITAT should recall its order under Section 254 to correct a manifest error apparent on record in PCIT vs Fiserv India Pvt Ltd case. Details here.
Analysis of Bombay High Court’s ruling in CCIT(OSD)/PCIT Vs Bhupendra Champaklal Dalal regarding presumption of interest-free usage of funds when interest-free and interest-bearing funds are mixed
Delhi High Court rules that Income Tax Officer cannot withhold taxpayer’s deposited amount without framing final assessment order during stay period. Full judgment analysis.
Madras High Court held that Tax Recovery Officer cannot declare sale made by the assessee in favour of 3rd party as void. It is the function of civil court to declare a transaction as null and void and the Tax Recovery Officer cannot exercise the said function.
In the case of Aurobindo Pharma Limited Vs ACIT before the ITAT Hyderabad, a Miscellaneous Application (MA) was dismissed as it raised arguments not presented during the main appeal and emphasized the restricted scope of Section 254(2).
