Full Judgment attached \
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs.SMT. LEONIE M.ALMEIDA
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Interest payable and receivable—Interest on delayed payment of amount specified in notice of demand—Settlement Commission—Respondent/assessee's case was taken up for assessement u/s 158BD and the assessment was made determining undisclosed income at specified amount—In the course of said proceeding, the assessee filed application before Settlement Commission and same was admitted by the Settlement Commission u/s 245D(1)—Final order was passed by the Settlement Commission wherein undisclosed income was decreased to certain amount—Assessee paid the demand within 30 days—ACIT issued a demand purporting to give effect to the order u/s 245D(4) charging and levying interest u/s 220(2) from the date of assessment order that is the date of order passed by the Settlement Commission—CIT(A) concurred with the assessee and allowed assessee's appeal holding that order of the AO does not survive after application u/s 254D(1) and hence AO was not justified in levying interest u/s 220(2) from the date of his assessment order to the date of final order passed by the Settlement Commission, in view of decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Damani Brothers—Tribunal held that the interest u/s 220(2) would be legally leviable from the date of default in payment of demand by the assessee till the date of admission of application by the assessee by settlement Commission u/s 245D(1) and not till the final order of settlement commission u/s 245D(4)—Held, in view of decision of apex court in CIT vs. Damani Brothers, interest could be charged pursuant to proceedings in normal course up to the date of decision u/s 245D(1)—Thus, interest under s 234B would be payable up to the stage of s 245D(1)—Revenue's appeal dismissed
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Interest payable and receivable—Interest on delayed payment of amount specified in notice of demand—Settlement Commission—Respondent/assessee's case was taken up for assessement u/s 158BD and the assessment was made determining undisclosed income at specified amount—In the course of said proceeding, the assessee filed application before Settlement Commission and same was admitted by the Settlement Commission u/s 245D(1)—Final order was passed by the Settlement Commission wherein undisclosed income was decreased to certain amount—Assessee paid the demand within 30 days—ACIT issued a demand purporting to give effect to the order u/s 245D(4) charging and levying interest u/s 220(2) from the date of assessment order that is the date of order passed by the Settlement Commission—CIT(A) concurred with the assessee and allowed assessee's appeal holding that order of the AO does not survive after application u/s 254D(1) and hence AO was not justified in levying interest u/s 220(2) from the date of his assessment order to the date of final order passed by the Settlement Commission, in view of decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Damani Brothers—Tribunal held that the interest u/s 220(2) would be legally leviable from the date of default in payment of demand by the assessee till the date of admission of application by the assessee by settlement Commission u/s 245D(1) and not till the final order of settlement commission u/s 245D(4)—Held, in view of decision of apex court in CIT vs. Damani Brothers, interest could be charged pursuant to proceedings in normal course up to the date of decision u/s 245D(1)—Thus, interest under s 234B would be payable up to the stage of s 245D(1)—Revenue's appeal dismissed
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs.ADITYA GUPTA
DELHI TRIBUNAL
Capital Gain—Mode of computation—Assessee filed his return of income which were processed u/s 143(1)—Subsequently, the case was reopened u/s 147 r.w.s 148—During reassessment proceedings, AO noticed that the assessee had shown a Long Term Capital Gain on sale of 32 ICICI Bonds and also had shown Long Term Capital Loss which was carried forward to the next year—AO also noticed that the assessee purchased 15,000 equity shares of 'M' for a consideration and sold those shares and also showed a loss from the concerned transaction—AO observed that the book value of the share at the time of purchase made by the assessee was at Rs. 533/- per share whereas the book value was at Rs. 665/- per share—AO concluded that shares were sold at such a huge loss within such a short period to the Managing Director of the company and an opinion was formed that selling of shares was a collusive transaction—Thus, for the purpose of calculation of capital loss, AO worked out the sale on the basis of book value on the date of sale i.e. Rs. 665/- per share and accordingly worked out the Long Term Capital Loss and disallowed specified sum—CIT(A) allowed partial relief to the assessee—On appeal ITAT restored the matter back to CIT(A) wherein relief was allowed to assessee—Held, for the purpose of calculation of capital gain of shares u/s 48, it was only the sum received which could be considered for calculation of capital gain—Issues under consideration was squarely covered vide order in the Assessee's brothers case titled as ACIT Vs Sh. Ashish Gupta for the A/Y 2002-03 wherein it was held that sale and purchase of share was done through cheques and transfer of shares was properly supported by the transfer deeds and complete formalities were done by the issuing company in respect of allotment of shares and transfer of shares—It was also observed that nothing adverse was brought by the AO except his belief that assessee was not expected to sell shares below the book value—Transaction in shares was similar in Assessee and his brother cases and that the ITAT had restored the issue to the CIT(A) deciding the appeals of the assessee as well as of Sh. Ashish Gupta by passing a common order—Respectfully following the order for the A/Y 2002-03 in the case of ACIT Vs Sh. Ashish Gupta, no merit was seen in this appeal of the department as well—Revenue's appeal dismissed
DELHI TRIBUNAL
Capital Gain—Mode of computation—Assessee filed his return of income which were processed u/s 143(1)—Subsequently, the case was reopened u/s 147 r.w.s 148—During reassessment proceedings, AO noticed that the assessee had shown a Long Term Capital Gain on sale of 32 ICICI Bonds and also had shown Long Term Capital Loss which was carried forward to the next year—AO also noticed that the assessee purchased 15,000 equity shares of 'M' for a consideration and sold those shares and also showed a loss from the concerned transaction—AO observed that the book value of the share at the time of purchase made by the assessee was at Rs. 533/- per share whereas the book value was at Rs. 665/- per share—AO concluded that shares were sold at such a huge loss within such a short period to the Managing Director of the company and an opinion was formed that selling of shares was a collusive transaction—Thus, for the purpose of calculation of capital loss, AO worked out the sale on the basis of book value on the date of sale i.e. Rs. 665/- per share and accordingly worked out the Long Term Capital Loss and disallowed specified sum—CIT(A) allowed partial relief to the assessee—On appeal ITAT restored the matter back to CIT(A) wherein relief was allowed to assessee—Held, for the purpose of calculation of capital gain of shares u/s 48, it was only the sum received which could be considered for calculation of capital gain—Issues under consideration was squarely covered vide order in the Assessee's brothers case titled as ACIT Vs Sh. Ashish Gupta for the A/Y 2002-03 wherein it was held that sale and purchase of share was done through cheques and transfer of shares was properly supported by the transfer deeds and complete formalities were done by the issuing company in respect of allotment of shares and transfer of shares—It was also observed that nothing adverse was brought by the AO except his belief that assessee was not expected to sell shares below the book value—Transaction in shares was similar in Assessee and his brother cases and that the ITAT had restored the issue to the CIT(A) deciding the appeals of the assessee as well as of Sh. Ashish Gupta by passing a common order—Respectfully following the order for the A/Y 2002-03 in the case of ACIT Vs Sh. Ashish Gupta, no merit was seen in this appeal of the department as well—Revenue's appeal dismissed
CIT vs. M/s SMSL-UANRCL (JV) (Bombay High Court) Full Judgment is attached
Even if contract is awarded to the Joint Venture, the income is assessable only in the hands of the person which has executed the work
The ITAT has as a matter of fact found that the assessee/ joint venture did not execute the contract work and the said work was done by one of its constituents namely SMS Infrastructure Limited. It is also found that the receipts for the said project work are reflected in the books of account of SMS Infrastructure Limited and in return, said SMS Infrastructure Limited has disclosed that income. The said return was accepted by the Assessing Officer
INCOME TAX REPORTS (ITR)--PRINT AND ONLINE EDITION
Business expenditure --Capital or revenue expenditure--General principles--Assessee engaged in manufacture and sale of music cassettes--Payment of lump sum to acquire master plate and copyright in music--Royalty--Expenditure on carpets in recording room--Expenditure on commencing video division--All expenses deductible--Income-tax Act, 1961, s. 37-- CIT v. Krishan Kumar (Delhi) . . . 159
Charitable purposes --Charitable trust--Exemption--Denial of exemption where section 13 applies--Amounts advanced to person with substantial interest in trust--Advance for purchase of land--No evidence of possession of land--Advance for more than a year without interest--Transaction not genuine--Assessee not entitled to exemption--Amount advanced to educational society for setting up university--No violation of provisions of section 13--Exemption could not be denied--Income-tax Act, 1961, ss. 11, 13-- Director of Income-tax (Exemption) v. Charanjiv Charitable Trust (Delhi) . . . 180
Charitable trust --Cash credits--Identity of donors and their creditworthiness established--Addition of donations under section 68 not justified--Income-tax Act, 1961, s. 68-- Director of Income-tax (Exemption) v. Charanjiv Charitable Trust (Delhi) . . . 180
Depreciation --Charitable trust--Cost of assets allowed as application of income of trust--Trust not entitled to depreciation on such assets--Income-tax Act, 1961, s. 32-- Director of Income-tax (Exemption) v. Charanjiv Charitable Trust (Delhi) . . . 180
Housing project --Special deduction--Not available for profits from sale of unutilised floor space index--Full details regarding floor space index given in assessment order--Matter could not be remanded--Income-tax Act, 1961, s. 80-IB(10)-- CIT v. Desai Developers (Guj) . . . 151
----Special deduction--Ownership of property not a condition precedent for grant of deduction--Marginal underutilisation of floor space index--Not to affect allowance --Assessee entitled to deduction--Income-tax Act, 1961, s. 80-IB(10)-- CIT v. Shreenath Infrastructure (Guj) . . . 144
Recovery of tax --Interest--Notice of demand--Where order revised or modified after passing assessment order--Notice of demand relates back to original notice of demand--Default on part of assessee--Interest leviable--Income-tax Act, 1961, ss. 139(8), 215, 220(2)--Taxation Laws (Continuation and Validation of Recovery Proceedings) Act, 1964, s. 3(b)(iii)-- CIT v. Udaipur Mineral Development Syndicate (P.) Ltd. (Raj) . . . 136
Reference --High Court--CBDT circulars--Monetary ceiling limits for filing appeal--Reference admitted--Matter cannot be disposed of without answering questions on merits merely because tax effect is minimal--Income-tax Act, 1961 s. 256(1), (2)-- CIT v. Udaipur Mineral Development Syndicate (P.) Ltd. (Raj) . . . 136
Non-resident --Income deemed to accrue or arise in India--Source rule of taxation--Fees for technical services--Definition--Expert services of non-resident engaged for preparation of scheme for raising requisite finances and tie up loans for power project--Services including developing comprehensive financial model to tie up rupee and foreign currency loan requirements of project, assisting expert credit agencies world-wide and obtaining commercial bank support on competitive terms, and assisting in loan negotiations and documentation with lenders--Amounts to consultancy service--Falls within definition of technical service--Payments to non-resident taxable--Liable to deduction of tax at source--Income-tax Act, 1961, s. 9(1)(i), (vii)(b)-- GVK Industries Ltd. v. ITO . . . 453
Accounting --Rejection of accounts--Estimate of income--Estimate should be based on past history and comparative cases--No evidence to justify additions--Addition not justified--Income-tax Act, 1961, s. 145-- CIT v. Gupta, K. N. Construction Co. (Raj) . . . 325
Appeal to Appellate Tribunal --Precedent--Order of Special Bench--Binding--That appeal therefrom pending before High Court--Not a ground to direct Assessing Officer to redecide issue after disposal of appeal by High Court--Tribunal either to follow or not to follow Special Bench decision--Tribunal to decide matter afresh--Income-tax Act, 1961-- CIT v. Janapriya Engineers Syndicate (T & AP) . . . 439
Assessment --Intimation--Prima facie adjustment--Only where facts are undisputed--Customs duty--Refund of substantial amount--Nature of receipt--Debatable issue--Assessing Officer determining nature of receipt as revenue receipt by prima facie adjustment--Impermissible--Income-tax Act, 1961, s. 143(1)(a)-- CIT v. Nagarjuna Fertilizers and Chemicals Ltd. (T & AP) . . . 318
Capital gains --Charge of tax--Transfer--Firm--Firm selling its assets to a company--Consideration in form of allotment of shares paid to partners--No distribution of assets--Does not mean there is no transfer--No direct transaction between partners and transferee--Manner of payment consideration not material--Money value of assets fixed--Liable to capital gains tax--Income-tax Act, 1961, ss. 45(1), 158BD-- Ana Labs v. Deputy CIT (T & AP) . . . 295
----Long-term capital gains--Income--Accrual of income--Real income theory--First development agreement not acted upon as agreement modified by tripartite agreement--Income earned under subsequent agreement offered as capital gains in subsequent years--Consideration in form of constructed area in terms of first development agreement did not really accrue to assessee--Not liable to capital gains--Income-tax Act, 1961-- CIT v. Chemosyn Ltd. (Bom) . . . 427
Capital or revenue expenditure --Shares in assessee held by two family groups--Dispute between two groups affecting business of assessee--Settlement helping assessee in substantial increase in business--Expenditure incurred by assessee to purchase its shares in terms of settlement--Revenue expenditure--Income-tax Act, 1961-- CIT v. Chemosyn Ltd. (Bom) . . . 427
Cash credit --Genuineness of transactions--Burden on Revenue--No effort made by Revenue to show whether creditors were credit worthy--Loans taken from family members--Creditors genuine and amounts shown in their books of account--No addition could be made--Income-tax Act, 1961-- Radha Raman Agrawal v. ITO (All) . . . 435
----Provision--Assessee liaisoning for supply of medical equipment--Lump sum received and shown in return--Assessee liable to maintain medical equipment--Amounts received adjusted against such expenses--Nil income shown in return for assessment year 2007-08--Amount attributable to assessment year 2007-08 added under section 68--Provision for maintenance found to be on scientific basis by Tribunal--Finding of fact--Amount not assessable under section 68--Income-tax Act, 1961, s. 68-- CIT v. Smt. Paramjeet Luthra (Delhi) . . . 306
Charitable purposes --Charitable institution--Exemption under section 10(23C)(iv)--Definition of “charitable purpose†in section 2(15)--Amendment of section 2(15) by Finance Act, 2008--Validity of amendment--Amendment to be read down--Primary and dominant object of institution to advance general public utility--Income generated by commercial activities incidental--Charitable institution entitled to exemption--Income-tax Act, 1961, ss. 2(15), 10(23C)(iv)-- India Trade Promotion Organization v. Director General of Income-tax (Exemptions) (Delhi) . . . 333
Deduction of tax at source --Failure to deduct tax--Limitation for taking action--Action to be taken within reasonable period in absence of prescription of time limit--Four-year period reasonable--Notice after seven years--Not justified--Income-tax Act, 1961, s. 201(1A)-- CIT v. U. B. Electronic Instruments Ltd. (T & AP) . . . 314
Export --Special deduction--Gains on account of fluctuations on account of exchange rates--Eligible for deduction--Import duty entitlement benefit partakes of the character of amounts covered by clause (iii) of section 28--Excludible from total turnover--Income-tax Act, 1961, s. 80HHC-- CIT v. Godavari Drugs Ltd. (T & AP) . . . 379
Firm --Difference between Indian Partnership Act and Income-tax Act--Indian Partnership Act, 1932--Income-tax Act, 1961-- CIT v. Muthoot Financiers (Delhi) . . . 408
Hindu undivided family --Family arrangement--Effect--Disposition in favour of six minor daughters of karta in form of fixed deposits--Interest cannot thereafter be treated as part of wealth of Hindu undivided family--Not taxable in hands of Hindu undivided family--Income-tax Act, 1961, s. 171-- P. Shankaraiah Yadav (HUF) v. ITO (T & AP) . . . 386
Income --Accrual of income--Mercantile system of accounting--Civil construction--Sums retained for payment after expiry of defect-free period--Right to receive amount contingent upon there being no defects--Accrual only on receipt of amount after defect-free period--Income-tax Act, 1961-- CIT v. Shanker Constructions (T & AP) . . . 320
Income from undisclosed sources --Accounting--Rejection of accounts--Estimate of income--Estimate cannot be based solely on consumption of electricity--Commissioner (Appeals) and Tribunal taking other factors also into consideration and reducing addition to income--Justified--Income-tax Act, 1961-- CIT v. Ram Steel Industries (P&H) . . . 373
Industrial undertaking --Special deduction--Profits eligible for deduction--Interest earned on deposits--Interest on deposit made in relation to business activity alone eligible for deduction--Income-tax Act, 1961, ss. 80HH, 80-I-- CIT v. Godavari Drugs Ltd. (T & AP) . . . 379
Interpretation of taxing statutes --Interpretation upholding validity--Reading down of provisions-- India Trade Promotion Organization v. Director General of Income-tax (Exemptions) (Delhi) . . . 333
Penalty --Loan or deposit in cash exceeding prescribed limit--Firm--Payments from partners in cash--Firm and partners are not different entities--Penalty cannot be imposed under section 271D--Income-tax Act, 1961, ss. 271D, 271E, 273B-- CIT v. Muthoot Financiers (Delhi) . . . 408
Precedent --Effect of decision of Supreme Court in CIT v. R. M. Chidambaram Pillai [1977] 106 ITR 292 (SC)-- CIT v. Muthoot Financiers (Delhi) . . . 408
----Effect of decision of Supreme Court in Rotork Controls India P. Ltd. v. CIT [2009] 314 ITR 62 (SC)-- CIT v. Smt. Paramjeet Luthra (Delhi) . . . 306
Reassessment --Notice--Reasons recorded by Assessing Officer referring to facts already on file--No sufficient or adequate material available with Assessing Officer--No rational and tangible nexus between reasons and belief--Assessing Officer had no jurisdiction to initiate reassessment proceedings--Income-tax Act, 1961, ss. 147, 148-- Arun Gupta v. Union of India (All) . . . 394
----Notice after four years--Failure to disclose material facts necessary for assessment--Details regarding capital gains disclosed in original assessment--Reassessment proceedings after four years to re-compute capital gains--Not valid--Income-tax Act, 1961, s. 45, 147, 148-- Jagdishbhai Govindlal Patel v. ITO (Guj) . . . 419
----Notice after four years--Nature of business--Assessing Officer in original assessment opining that assessee engaged in shipping and allowing deduction under section 33AC--Application of mind by Assessing Officer in original assessment--Reopening of assessment on basis of letter of Commissioner (Appeals) containing identical facts stated by assessee--Not valid--Income-tax Act, 1961, ss. 33AC, 147, 148-- United Shippers Ltd. v. Asst. CIT (Bom) . . . 441
----Notice after four years--Validity--Failure to disclose material facts necessary for assessment--Additional depreciation allowed in scrutiny assessment--Notice after four years to withdraw additional depreciation--No failure to disclose material facts necessary for assessment--Notice not valid--Income-tax Act, 1961, ss. 32, 147, 148-- Rantnamani Metals and Tubes Ltd. v. Deputy CIT (Guj) . . . 301
Revision --Commissioner--Powers--Erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue--Depressed sales and 60 per cent. discount offered on account of ongoing sealing drive conducted by municipal authorities--Insufficient to take a different view--Revision invalid--Income-tax Act, 1961, s. 263-- CIT v. Garg Cheap Cut Piece House (Delhi) . . . 291
S. 2(15) --Charitable purposes--Charitable institution--Exemption under section 10(23C)(iv)--Definition of “charitable purpose†in section 2(15)--Amendment of section 2(15) by Finance Act, 2008--Validity of amendment--Amendment to be read down--Primary and dominant object of institution to advance general public utility--Income generated by commercial activities incidental--Charitable institution entitled to exemption-- India Trade Promotion Organization v. Director General of Income-tax (Exemptions) (Delhi) . . . 333
S. 9(1)(i), (vii)(b) --Non-resident--Income deemed to accrue or arise in India--Source rule of taxation--Fees for technical services--Definition--Expert services of non-resident engaged for preparation of scheme for raising requisite finances and tie up loans for power project--Services including developing comprehensive financial model to tie up rupee and foreign currency loan requirements of project, assisting expert credit agencies world-wide and obtaining commercial bank support on competitive terms, and assisting in loan negotiations and documentation with lenders--Amounts to consultancy service--Falls within definition of technical service--Payments to non-resident taxable--Liable to deduction of tax at source-- GVK Industries Ltd. v. ITO (SC) . . . 453
S. 10(23C)(iv) --Charitable purposes--Charitable institution--Exemption under section 10(23C)(iv)--Definition of “charitable purpose†in section 2(15)--Amendment of section 2(15) by Finance Act, 2008--Validity of amendment--Amendment to be read down--Primary and dominant object of institution to advance general public utility--Income generated by commercial activities incidental--Charitable institution entitled to exemption-- India Trade Promotion Organization v. Director General of Income-tax (Exemptions) (Delhi) . . . 333
S. 32 --Reassessment--Notice after four years--Validity--Failure to disclose material facts necessary for assessment--Additional depreciation allowed in scrutiny assessment--Notice after four years to withdraw additional depreciation--No failure to disclose material facts necessary for assessment--Notice not valid-- Rantnamani Metals and Tubes Ltd. v. Deputy CIT (Guj) . . . 301
S. 33AC --Reassessment--Notice after four years--Nature of business--Assessing Officer in original assessment opining that assessee engaged in shipping and allowing deduction under section 33AC--Application of mind by Assessing Officer in original assessment--Reopening of assessment on basis of letter of Commissioner (Appeals) containing identical facts stated by assessee--Not valid-- United Shippers Ltd. v. Asst. CIT (Bom) . . . 441
S. 45 --Reassessment--Notice after four years--Failure to disclose material facts necessary for assessment--Details regarding capital gains disclosed in original assessment--Reassessment proceedings after four years to re-compute capital gains--Not valid-- Jagdishbhai Govindlal Patel v. ITO (Guj) . . . 419
S. 45(1) --Capital gains--Charge of tax--Transfer--Firm--Firm selling its assets to a company--Consideration in form of allotment of shares paid to partners--No distribution of assets--Does not mean there is no transfer--No direct transaction between partners and transferee--Manner of payment consideration not material--Money value of assets fixed--Liable to capital gains tax-- Ana Labs v. Deputy CIT (T & AP) . . . 295
S. 68 --Cash credit--Provision--Assessee liaisoning for supply of medical equipment--Lump sum received and shown in return--Assessee liable to maintain medical equipment--Amounts received adjusted against such expenses--Nil income shown in return for assessment year 2007-08--Amount attributable to assessment year 2007-08 added under section 68--Provision for maintenance found to be on scientific basis by Tribunal--Finding of fact--Amount not assessable under section 68-- CIT v. Smt. Paramjeet Luthra (Delhi) . . . 306
S. 80HH --Industrial undertaking--Special deduction--Profits eligible for deduction--Interest earned on deposits--Interest on deposit made in relation to business activity alone eligible for deduction-- CIT v. Godavari Drugs Ltd. (T & AP) . . . 379
S. 80HHC --Export--Special deduction--Gains on account of fluctuations on account of exchange rates--Eligible for deduction--Import duty entitlement benefit partakes of the character of amounts covered by clause (iii) of section 28--Excludible from total turnover-- CIT v. Godavari Drugs Ltd. (T & AP) . . . 379
S. 80-I --Industrial undertaking--Special deduction--Profits eligible for deduction--Interest earned on deposits--Interest on deposit made in relation to business activity alone eligible for deduction-- CIT v. Godavari Drugs Ltd. (T & AP) . . . 379
S. 143(1)(a) --Assessment--Intimation--Prima facie adjustment--Only where facts are undisputed--Customs duty--Refund of substantial amount--Nature of receipt--Debatable issue--Assessing Officer determining nature of receipt as revenue receipt by prima facie adjustment--Impermissible-- CIT v. Nagarjuna Fertilizers and Chemicals Ltd. (T & AP) . . . 318
S. 145 --Accounting--Rejection of accounts--Estimate of income--Estimate should be based on past history and comparative cases--No evidence to justify additions--Addition not justified-- CIT v. Gupta, K. N. Construction Co. (Raj) . . . 325
S. 147 --Reassessment--Notice--Reasons recorded by Assessing Officer referring to facts already on file--No sufficient or adequate material available with Assessing Officer--No rational and tangible nexus between reasons and belief--Assessing Officer had no jurisdiction to initiate reassessment proceedings-- Arun Gupta v. Union of India (All) . . . 394
----Reassessment--Notice after four years--Failure to disclose material facts necessary for assessment--Details regarding capital gains disclosed in original assessment--Reassessment proceedings after four years to re-compute capital gains--Not valid-- Jagdishbhai Govindlal Patel v. ITO (Guj) . . . 419
----Reassessment--Notice after four years--Nature of business--Assessing Officer in original assessment opining that assessee engaged in shipping and allowing deduction under section 33AC--Application of mind by Assessing Officer in original assessment--Reopening of assessment on basis of letter of Commissioner (Appeals) containing identical facts stated by assessee--Not valid-- United Shippers Ltd. v. Asst. CIT (Bom) . . . 441
----Reassessment--Notice after four years--Validity--Failure to disclose material facts necessary for assessment--Additional depreciation allowed in scrutiny assessment-- Notice after four years to withdraw additional depreciation--No failure to disclose material facts necessary for assessment--Notice not valid-- Rantnamani Metals and Tubes Ltd. v. Deputy CIT (Guj) . . . 301
S. 148 --Reassessment--Notice--Reasons recorded by Assessing Officer referring to facts already on file--No sufficient or adequate material available with Assessing Officer--No rational and tangible nexus between reasons and belief--Assessing Officer had no jurisdiction to initiate reassessment proceedings-- Arun Gupta v. Union of India (All) . . . 394
----Reassessment--Notice after four years--Failure to disclose material facts necessary for assessment--Details regarding capital gains disclosed in original assessment--Reassessment proceedings after four years to re-compute capital gains--Not valid-- Jagdishbhai Govindlal Patel v. ITO (Guj) . . . 419
----Reassessment--Notice after four years--Nature of business--Assessing Officer in original assessment opining that assessee engaged in shipping and allowing deduction under section 33AC--Application of mind by Assessing Officer in original assessment--Reopening of assessment on basis of letter of Commissioner (Appeals) containing identical facts stated by assessee--Not valid-- United Shippers Ltd. v. Asst. CIT (Bom) . . . 441
----Reassessment--Notice after four years--Validity--Failure to disclose material facts necessary for assessment--Additional depreciation allowed in scrutiny assessment--Notice after four years to withdraw additional depreciation--No failure to disclose material facts necessary for assessment--Notice not valid-- Rantnamani Metals and Tubes Ltd. v. Deputy CIT (Guj) . . . 301
S. 158BD --Capital gains--Charge of tax--Transfer--Firm--Firm selling its assets to a company--Consideration in form of allotment of shares paid to partners--No distribution of assets--Does not mean there is no transfer--No direct transaction between partners and transferee--Manner of payment consideration not material--Money value of assets fixed--Liable to capital gains tax-- Ana Labs v. Deputy CIT (T & AP) . . . 295
S. 171 --Hindu undivided family--Family arrangement--Effect--Disposition in favour of six minor daughters of karta in form of fixed deposits--Interest cannot thereafter be treated as part of wealth of Hindu undivided family--Not taxable in hands of Hindu undivided family-- P. Shankaraiah Yadav (HUF) v. ITO (T & AP) . . . 386
S. 201(1A) --Deduction of tax at source--Failure to deduct tax--Limitation for taking action--Action to be taken within reasonable period in absence of prescription of time limit--Four-year period reasonable--Notice after seven years--Not justified-- CIT v. U.B. Electronic Instruments Ltd. (T & AP) . . . 314
S. 263 --Revision--Commissioner--Powers--Erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue--Depressed sales and 60 per cent. discount offered on account of ongoing sealing drive conducted by municipal authorities--Insufficient to take a different view--Revision invalid-- CIT v. Garg Cheap Cut Piece House (Delhi) . . . 291
S. 271D --Penalty--Loan or deposit in cash exceeding prescribed limit--Firm--Payments from partners in cash--Firm and partners are not different entities--Penalty cannot be imposed under section 271D-- CIT v. Muthoot Financiers (Delhi) . . . 408
S. 271E --Penalty--Loan or deposit in cash exceeding prescribed limit--Firm--Payments from partners in cash--Firm and partners are not different entities--Penalty cannot be imposed under section 271D-- CIT v. Muthoot Financiers (Delhi) . . . 408
S. 273B --Penalty--Loan or deposit in cash exceeding prescribed limit--Firm--Payments from partners in cash--Firm and partners are not different entities--Penalty cannot be imposed under section 271D-- CIT v. Muthoot Financiers (Delhi) . . . 408
__._,_.___
No comments:
Post a Comment