Mahendra Feeds and Foods (Trading Division) Vs Deputy Commissioner of GST and Central Excise (Madras High Court) The petitioner is a dealer under the GST regime. He has availed Input Tax Credit (ITC) for the Financial Year 2017-18 and 2018-19 from December 2017 to March 2019. But, according to the Revenue, the ITC claimed by […]
Ester Industries Ltd Vs ACIT (Delhi High Court) This Court is of the view that the petitioner/assessee has the right to get adequate time in accordance with the Act to submit its reply. It is pertinent to mention that Section 148A(b) permits the Assessing Officer to suo moto provide up to thirty day’s period to […]
CIT (TDS) Vs Tata Teleservices Ltd. (Delhi High Court) Whether the ITAT was correct in holding that no TDS under Section 194J of the Income Tax Act was required to be deducted by the assessee on payment of interconnect user charges as it could not be categorized as fee for technical services? Admittedly, the Karnataka […]
Vice Chairman Settlement Commission Vs Zyeta Interiors Pvt. Ltd (Karnataka High Court) Whatever the ratio, the tax in its entirety has reached the hands of the ex-chequer. Merely for the reason that there was no strict adherence to the ratio as envisaged during the relevant point of time for payment of tax insofar as the assessee and […]
Prem Brothers Infrastructure LLP Vs National Faceless Assessment Centre (Delhi High Court) This Court is of the opinion that the only addition in the assessment order framed is in respect of disallowance under section 14A of the Act. The Petitioner has made a disallowance of Rs.3,20,14,010/- which was recomputed by the Assessing Officer at Rs.6,82,45,759/-. […]
Meenu Chaufla Vs ITO (Delhi High Court) Court is of the view that the petitioner/assessee has the right to get adequate time in accordance with the Act to submit its reply. It is pertinent to mention that Section 148A(b) permits the Assessing Officer to suo moto provide up to thirty days’ period to an assessee […]
Appellant claimed that order passed under section 148A(d) of the Act and notice dated 31st March, 2022 issued under section 148 of the Act have been passed/issued in gross violation of the principles of natural justice.
Conduct cannot impliedly waive the rights under Section 12(5) of the A&C Act. The waiver under Section 12(5) of the A&C Act has to be by an express agreement in writing.
Rajesh Kumar Malhotra Vs ACIT (Delhi High Court) This Court is of the view that the Petitioner has not been provided an adequate opportunity to put forward its defense/reply as the annexure accompanying the notice enumerating the reasons for initiating reassessment pertained to the Assessment Year 2015-16 and not 2018-19. It is pertinent to mention […]
HC held that despite lapse of four years and a scrutiny assessment, there is fresh tangible material in the present case in the form of information of beneficiaries of bogus LTCL/STCL report prepared by the office of Deputy Director of Income Tax (Investigation) which reveals that Mahanivesh (India) Ltd. is a penny stock whose share price was manipulated in trade by way of a complex web of pre-arranged or artificial transactions to book long term/short term capital gain/loss to the beneficiaries.
