The Bombay High Court upheld the income tax deduction under Section 80IA(4)(iii) for an Industrial Park project. The court considered the approval granted by the Ministry of Commerce and Industry and rejected the AO’s disallowance based on an erroneous report.
The petitioner would not have delayed the return as it was entitled for a refund. Cause of justice should not be defeated for technicalities.
Bombay HC sets aside tax refund rejection of Wallem Shipmanagement. Court cites COVID-19 disruptions and upholds principles of natural justice
Bombay High Court held that after the recognition of the first charge of the assessee as a secured creditor, the charge of the Sales Tax Department to recover the sales tax dues would be valid.
Bombay High Court held that the amount of tax refunded to the Petitioner, including interest, is to be reduced while determining the amount of disputed tax under KVSS as the Petitioner had not disclosed and calculated tax properly.
In a tax case of Rajesh Poddar Vs ITO, the Bombay High Court set aside the order and directed re-adjudication due to failure in providing reasons for reopening the assessment.
Read how Bombay High Court ruled in favor of New Age Buildtech Pvt Ltd, quashing invalid notices issued in the name of non-existent company ERP Infra Pvt Ltd.
Bombay High Court held that different view by Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) in case of another Applicant cannot be ground for reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act.
Bombay High Court’s landmark ruling confirms that only the profit element of bogus purchases can be added to taxable income, emphasizing the requirement for reconciliation of stock in cases of alleged accommodation entries.
The Bombay High Court has directed the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) to re-consider the addition made on account of bogus purchases in the case of PCIT vs. Nitin Ramdeoji Lohia. The court found that the ITAT had dismissed the Revenue’s appeals and allowed the assessee’s appeal based on incomplete investigation and failure to consider relevant documents and evidence.
