Where AO failed to issue a notice under Section 143(2) and proceed directly by rejecting the return filed by assessee, the reassessment action would thus be liable to be quashed.
Delhi High Court held that that there was no justification for the respondents to issue notices afresh seeking to reopen the proceedings which had been concluded prior to the judgment passed in Ashish Agarwal.
ITAT Chennai held that no findings have been rendered on various documentary evidences furnished by the assessee. Accordingly, matter restored in view of violation of the principle of natural justice.
Rajasthan High Court held that addition on account of bogus accommodation entries merely based on admission of assessee in absence of any corroborative evidence unjustified. Thus, addition held as unsustainable.
ITAT Pune held that exemption under section 54F of the Income Tax Act entirely allowed as entire amount re-invested by the assessee and name of the son taken only as a proforma purchaser.
Madras High Court held that lease rent received from letting out property in industrial park is chargeable to tax under the head ‘Income from Business’ and not under the head ‘Income from house property’.
ITAT Delhi held that the onus is always on the assessee to substantiate with evidence to the satisfaction of the AO regarding the identity and credit worthiness of the loan creditor and genuineness of the transaction. Matter restored to verify transaction for addition u/s. 68.
Delhi High Court clarifies taxability of profits attributed to a Permanent Establishment (PE) under the India-UAE DTAA, even when global losses are incurred.
Tata Sons challenges incorrect interest calculation on refunds under Section 244A. ITAT Mumbai directs reassessment of refund and interest for AY 1993-94.
Delhi High Court addresses Ericsson’s challenge to CCI jurisdiction over Standard Essential Patents (SEPs) and royalty claims under the Competition Act.
