High Court set aside the AO’s addition of expenses in the assessment of a SEBI Category II AIF, holding that the addition was unlawful as no deduction was claimed by the fund or its unit holders.
The Bombay High Court has quashed a penalty order against Man Truck & Bus India Pvt. Ltd., citing a failure to grant a virtual hearing and a flawed assessment basis under an Advanced Pricing Agreement.
The Bombay High Court dismisses a tax appeal, affirming the right of charitable trusts to carry forward and set off previous years’ deficits against current income.
The Bombay High Court dismisses a writ petition from a taxpayer challenging assessment and penalty orders, citing the principle of alternative remedy and directing the petitioner to pursue existing appeals before the CIT(A) for a swift resolution.
The Bombay High Court has quashed an order by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), ruling that a subsequent judgment from a superior court is not a valid ground to rectify or recall a previous order.
The Bombay High Court dismissed a tax appeal, ruling that interest earned by a real estate developer on income tax refunds and fixed deposits had a direct nexus with their main business of developing IT Parks and SEZs.
Bombay High Court disposed of a 1999 writ on ITAT premises, holding that additional Benches functioning since 2001 under interim orders need no further directions.
Bombay High Court upheld CIT(A) and ITAT orders deleting penalty of ₹2.75 lakh, holding that ad-hoc estimation of profit from alleged hawala purchases does not amount to concealment of income.
The present appeal has been preferred by the appellant. Notably, sub-section (2) of section 35-G provides that the party aggrieved by an order passed by the appellate tribunal may file appeal to the High Court within a period of 180 days from the date on which the order appealed against is received by the aggrieved party.
The Bombay High Court set aside an order denying tax exemption to People’s Mobile Hospitals, a charitable trust, for a delay of 84 days in filing Form 10B. The court ruled that the delay was procedural and not a willful default, emphasizing a “justice-oriented” approach in such cases.
