Gauhati High Court in the case of Leela Choudhary vs. CIT 289 ITR 226 held that Order passed under section 263 of the I.T. Act without considering the reply of the assessee would not be valid.
Ms. Haryana Distillery Limited Vs JCIT, TDS (ITAT Delhi) Section 272A(2)(k) of the I.T. Act provides penalty for failure to deliver or cause to deliver a copy of the statement within the time specified in sub-section (3) of Section 200 or the proviso to sub-section 3 of Section 206(c) of the I.T. Act. Section 273B […]
Ms. Nikunj Malik Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) It is well settled law that contents of the registered document cannot be disputed through oral evidence. On the face of the registered sale deed, it is established that assessee made an investment in cash in purchase of property for a sum of Rs.42 lakhs and other amount […]
CIT(A) quashed the reassessment proceedings on the ground that the same has been initiated on a non-existing entity and, therefore, the reassessment proceedings are void ab initio.
DCIT Vs Pradeep Aggarwal (ITAT Delhi) Since the assessee in the instant case has surrendered additional income and paid the taxes due thereon and no specific query was raised by the search party at the time of search to substantiate the manner of earning such income, therefore, following the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High […]
Young Indian Vs Addl. DIT (Inv.) (ITAT Delhi) There was a deliberate defiance on the part of the assessee for non-submission of the same under the pretext that some of the details are available in the records of the Income Tax Department or some of the details are available in the Website of the Ministry of […]
Sahara Global Vision Pvt. Ltd Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) Assessee entered into joint venture by way of participating in a company in USA for distribution of petroleum and chemical products after obtaining approval from RBI. There is also no dispute that the joint venture company in USA was liquidated. The facts on record show that […]
Smt. Kamlesh Goel Vs The I.T.O (ITAT Delhi) The bone of contention is as to whether the Assessing Officer has rightly framed the impugned order within 16 days of disposing of the objections of the assessee. The answer is given by the coordinate bench in the case of Metaplast Engineering P. Ltd in ITA No. […]
Where AO had framed the reassessment under section 148 without issuing notice under section 143(2), the reassessment order was invalid because it is mandatory obligation of AO to serve notice by assigning reasons therein with regard to his belief of escaped tax liability before making assessment of any escaped income.
Moet Hennessy India Pvt Ltd Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) In the present case, no new facts have emerged and all the facts brought to record, during the course of the assessment proceedings, do not indicate legally sustainable basis for coming to the conclusion that there was an internal transaction in respect of AMP expenses incurred […]
