Dear Subscriber,
The following important updates are available at itatonline.org:
Join the itatonline.org Telegram Channel for speedy updates
Association News
All India Federation of Tax Practitioners announce a series of online lectures on Income Tax Act, 2025 under already Announced Weekly Webinar Series 2025.
📣 Announcement 📢 All India Federation of Tax Practitioners announce a series of online lectures on Income Tax Act, 2025 under already Announced Weekly Webinar Series 2025. Day, Date & Time: Friday, 19th September, 2025 at 5.00 p.m. Sharp Topic: Reassessment, Revision and Rectification (Chapter XVI Part A Clauses 279... [Read more]
Case Laws
Gateway Terminals India Pvt. Ltd. v. DCITBombay High Court: S. 80IA : Industrial undertakings-Enterprises engaged in infrastructure development-Derived-Interest income on fixed deposits kept for contractual obligations and Interest on wrongful deduction of TDS refund-Eligible for deduction as profits derived from infrastructure facility. [S. 56 , 80IA(ii), 254(2), 260A, Art. 226] The assessee, Gateway Terminals India Pvt. Ltd., a joint venture between APM Terminals Mauritius… Read More ...
Bombay High Court: S. 80IA : Industrial undertakings-Enterprises engaged in infrastructure development-Income tax refund-Interest on excess payment of tax-Income derived from eligible business-Eligible for deduction- No substantial question of law. [S. 260A] The assessee, a developer of IT Parks and SEZ, claimed deduction u/s 80-IA not only on lease rental income (undisputedly eligible) but also on interest received… Read More ...
Mumbai Tribunal : S. 69C : Unexplained expenditure-Bogus purchases-Addition made on estimated basis of 25% of purchases deleted-Purchases supported by bills, stock register, delivery challans and bank payments-Supplier appeared before AO and confirmed sales-ITAT held that once purchases are corroborated by evidence and vendor’s statement, no addition could be sustained-Bombay High Court ruling in PCIT v. Kanak Impex… Read More ...
Mumbai Tribunal : S. 69C : Unexplained Expenditure – Bogus Purchases – Addition unsustainable when purchases supported by documents, payments through banking channel, sales accepted, and no cross-examination allowed – VAT authorities accepted purchases-Addition was deleted -Bombay High Court ruling in PCIT v. Kanak Impex (India) Ltd [2025] 474 ITR 175 / 172 taxmann.com 283 (Bom)(HC) is distinguished.[S.133(6),… Read More ...
Mumbai Tribunal : S. 69C : Unexplained expenditure -Bogus Purchases - Only profit element to be taxed- Addition restricted to 12.5% of alleged bogus purchases- Bombay High Court ruling in PCIT v. Kanak Impex(India) Ltd [2025] 474 ITR 175 / 172 taxmann.com 283 (Bom)(HC) is distinguished. [ S. 133(6), 147 , 148 ] The assessee, engaged in construction,… Read More ...
Mumbai Tribunal : S. 69C : Unexplained expenditure - Bogus purchases - Addition restricted to 4% – Tribunal held that since purchases were supported by invoices, bank statements, stock register, and no defect was found in books or sales, only profit element could be added. High Court decision in PCIT v. Kanak Impex (India) Ltd. [2025] 474 ITR… Read More ...
HONBLE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ,AGRA BENCH SMC .AGRA : ONCE THE ASSESSEE HAD FURNISHED BEFORE THE AO SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS REGARDING SALARY OF RS,348918 PAYABLE AS ON 31-03-2016 TO BE GENUINE BUSINESS LIABILITY ARISING IN THE REGULAR COURSE OF BUSINESS, WHICH WAS PAID IN THE SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEAR THEN PROVISIONS OF SECTION 56 OF THE ACT PER SE COULD NOT MADE APPLICABLE TO THE IMPUGNED… Read More ...
Bombay High Court: S. 144C : Dispute Resolution Panel-Draft Assessment Order-Eligible assessee-Not an eligible assessee if TPO makes no variation- Assessment order without jurisdiction-Quashed assessment order. [S. 92CA(3), 144C(15)(b), Art. 226] The assessee challenged the Draft Assessment Order under section 144C and the consequential final assessment and penalty notices. The Assessing Officer had referred the case to the… Read More ...
Bombay High Court: S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Bogus purchases-Addition on estimation-Rejection of books oaf account-Penalty not leviable. [S. 145(3), 147, 148, 260A] The assessee, engaged in operating a photo studio, had filed return for AY 2011–12. In reassessment, the AO, relying on Sales Tax Department information, treated purchases from alleged hawala parties as non-genuine, rejected books u/s 145(3), and… Read More ...
Bombay High Court: S. 255 : Income tax Appellate Tribunal–Additional premises for the functioning of Court Rooms–Interim order of the High Court dated 28th June, 2000 allotting the premises to ITAT for the functioning of additional five court rooms is affirmed [S. 254, Art. 226] The ITAT Bar Association Mumbai has filed a PIL before the Bombay High… Read More ...
Bombay High Court: S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes – Carry forward of deficit – Excess expenditure incurred by trust in earlier years – Set off against income of subsequent years – Permissible – Appeal of Revenue dismissed. [S. 11(1)(a), 11(1)(d), 260A.] The Revenue challenged the Tribunal’s order allowing the assessee–trust to carry forward the deficit… Read More ...
Bombay High Court: S. 270A : Penalty for under -reporting and misreporting of income - Transfer Pricing adjustment – Advanced Pricing Agreement – No order passed u/s. 92CD(3) on modified return – Virtual hearing mandatory under Faceless Penalty Scheme – Penalty order quashed and matter remanded to AO to grant virtual hearing and pass fresh speaking order within… Read More ...
Bombay High Court: S. 143(3) Assessment – Disallowance of expenditure – Business income - Entries in the books of account is not conclusive- Alternative remedy – No deduction of expenses claimed either by assessee or unit holders – Addition made by AO wholly without jurisdiction – Writ petition maintainable – Assessment order quashed. [S. 10(23FBA), 28(i), 37(1), 115UB,… Read More ...
Supreme Court: Sale of an immovable property has to be for a price. Payment of price is essential, even if it is payable in the future. A sale deed executed without the payment of price is not a sale at all in the eyes of law. It is void. “54. “Sale” defined.—“Sale” is a transfer of ownership… Read More ...
Supreme Court: Condonation of 3966 days delay: Courts ought not give a legitimizing effect to such callous attitude of State authorities or its instrumentalities, and should remain extra cautious, if the party seeking condonation of delay is a State-authority. They should not become surrogates for State laxity and lethargy. Constitutional courts ought to be cognizant of the… Read More ...
Delhi ITAT: Case of alleged bogus purchase: All details in the form of books of accounts, copy invoices, GR, bilties etc. were filed before the Assessing Officer and the AO without pointing out any specific defect therein rejected the books of account u/s 145(3) and made the impugned addition of Rs. Rs.12,86,416/- by applying the GP rate… Read More ...
Delhi ITAT: Hon'ble ITAT held that Notice issued u/s 143(2) by the Assessing Officer on 24.09.2018 having been issued in violation of the binding CBDT Instruction No.F.No.225/157/2017/ITA-II dated 23.06.2017. The CBDT u/s 119 of the Act issued the above instructions prescribing mandatory revised formats for all scrutiny notices issued u/s 143(2) of the Act. These instructions are… Read More ...
Bombay High Court: S. 254(2) : Appellate Tribunal-Rectification of mistake apparent from the record-PF/ESI contribution-Subsequent decision of Supreme Court-Cannot be ground for rectification-Tribunal erred in recalling its order on the basis of subsequent ruling-Writ petition allowed. [S. 254(1), 143(1)(a), 36(1)(va), 43B, 260A, Art. 226, CPC O. 47 R.1] The assessee filed return for AY 2019–20. CPC disallowed employees’… Read More ...
ITAT Mumbai: S. 73 : Loss in share trading-Speculation loss-Set-off-Not allowable against profit from F&O transactions-Arbitrage operations- Explanation to S.73 operates independently of S.43(5)-Speculative loss cannot be adjusted against F&O business income. [S. 28(i), 43(5)] The assessee, a stock broker, engaged in arbitrage operations, simultaneously purchased shares in the cash segment and sold them in the F&O… Read More ...
Bombay High Court (Goa Bench): Central Goods and Service tax Act , 2017 . S. 73 : Demands and recovery – Determination of tax - Joint Development Agreement – Real estate developer - Time of supply of service - Time of supply under Joint development agreement is governed by Notification 04/2018, i.e., on conveyance/allotment, not agreement date,-Any deposit obtained without… Read More ...
Bombay High Court: S. 143(3) : Assessment- Appeal pending before CIT(A)-Writ- Alternate remedy-Writ petition not maintainable- Extraordinary jurisdiction-Not to be invoked when alternate statutory remedy is available- The Court directed CIT(A) to dispose of the appeals (both against assessment and penalty orders) within eight weeks. [S. 144B, 250, Art. 226] The assessee challenged the assessment order passed, demand… Read More ...
Article
Income-tax Act, 2025- Penalties – Chapter XXI – Sections 439 to 472 (Other than Sections 448 and 449 Penalties relating to tax deduction at source) by Dr. K. Shivaram, Senior Advocate.
By KSA LEGAL CHAMBER: Income-tax Act, 2025- Penalties - Chapter XXI - Sections 439 to 472 (Other than Sections 448 and 449 Penalties relating to tax deduction at source) by Dr. K. Shivaram, Senior Advocate. Read More ...
Regards,
Editorial Board