The following important judgements are available for download at itatonline.org.
ACIT (Agr. IT) vs. Netley 'B' Estate (Supreme Court)
While an amendment to overrule a judgement is not valid, it is permissible to retrospectively alter the character of the levy so as to save it from illegality
In exercising legislative power, the legislature by mere declaration, without anything more, cannot directly overrule, revise or override a judicial decision. It can render judicial decision ineffective by enacting valid law on the topic within its legislative field fundamentally altering or changing its character retrospectively
Binani Cement Ltd vs. CIT (Calcutta High Court)
S. 37(1): Expenditure on an aborted capital project is revenue in nature & can be claimed as deduction in year of abandoning the project
Expenditure made for construction/acquisition of new facility subsequently abandoned at the work-in-progress stage is allowable as incurred wholly or exclusively for the purpose of assessee's business. It is revenue expenditure as it does not result in the acquisition of an asset or an advantage of an enduring nature
Bir Bahadur Singh Sijwali vs. ITO (ITAT Delhi)
S. 147: Reopening an assessment on the ground that there is need of an inquiry which may result in detection of an income escaping assessment is not valid
The important point is that even though reasons, as recorded, may not necessarily prove escapement of income at the stage of recording the reasons, such reasons must point out to an income escaping assessment and not merely need of an inquiry which may result in detection of an income escaping assessment
Direct Sales Pvt. Ltd vs. ITO (ITAT Delhi)
S. 147/151: Merely stating "Approved" is not sufficient sanction of CIT and renders reopening void
A simple reading of the provisions of Sec. 151 (1) with the proviso clearly show that no such notice shall be issued unless the Commissioner is satisfied on the reasons recorded by the AO that it is a fit case for the issue of notice which means that the satisfaction of the Commissioner is paramount for which the least that is expected from the Commissioner is application of mind and due diligence before according sanction to the reasons recorded by the AO
CIT vs. Jansampark Advertising & Marketing (P) Ltd (Delhi High Court)
S. 68: Assessment proceedings under the Income Tax Act are not a game of hide and seek. If AO does not conduct proper inquiry, the obligation to do so is on the CIT(A) & ITAT
The AO here may have failed to discharge his obligation to conduct a proper inquiry to take the matter to logical conclusion. But CIT (Appeals), having noticed want of proper inquiry, could not have closed the chapter simply by allowing the appeal and deleting the additions made. It was also the obligation of the first appellate authority, as indeed of ITAT, to have ensured that effective inquiry was carried out, particularly in the face of the allegations of the Revenue that the account statements reveal a uniform pattern of cash deposits of equal amounts in the respective accounts preceding the transactions in question
Regards,
Editor,
---------------------
Latest:CIT vs. Sati Oil Udyog Ltd (Supreme Court)
S. 143(1A): As the object of s. 143 (1A) is to prevent tax evasion, it can apply only to tax evaders and not to honest assessees. The burden of proving that the assessee stated a lesser amount in the return in an attempt to evade tax is on the revenue
__._,_.___
No comments:
Post a Comment