Two Imp Judgements On Faceless E-Assessments And Six Judgements On Other Core Topics

[itatonl...@gmail.com]

See the footer if you would like to unsubscribe from the newsletter

Dear Subscriber,

The following important updates are available at itatonline.org:

The Chief Election Commissioner of India Vs M R Vijayabhasker & Ors (Supreme Court)

This judgement makes an interesting reading and highlights the zeal of the highest court to follow the policy of openness not only for courts but for all decision making authorities. This judgement can be used in any litigation. An open court proceeding ensures that the judicial process is subject to public scrutiny. Public scrutiny is crucial to maintaining transparency and accountability. Transparency in the functioning of democratic institutions is crucial to establish the public‘s faith in them.

Antony Alphonse Kevin Alphonse vs. The Income Tax Officer, National e-Assessment Centre (Madras High Court)

Madras high quashes an assessment order passed by NFeAC even before the time to respond elapsed.

“Since the impugned order has been passed before the time prescribed for filing the reply, it is evident that the impugned order has been passed with pre-set mind. In any event, the order has been passed without considering the reply received from the petitioner. Therefore, this Court is inclined to grant the relief sought for by the petitioner as there is a manifest violation of business of justice while passing the impugned order“

M/S SAS FININVEST LLP vs. NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT NEW DELHI (DELHI HIGH COURT)

Writ Petition admitted on the point that the assessment has been carried out under the Faceless Assessment Scheme, 2019 read with Faceless Assessment (1st Amendment) Scheme, 2021, without the revenue issuing a show-cause notice (accompanied by the relevant material) before proceeding to pass the impugned assessment order.

Maruti Insurance Broking Private Limited Vs DCIT(Delhi High Court)

When a business can be said to have been set up ? What is the difference between setting up of a business as compared to commencement of business. The court noted that the assessee, having acquired the necessary wherewithal and physical infrastructure for carrying on its business – it was only waiting for the approval of its application for commencement. The Tribunal failed to appreciate the difference between the assessee being ready to commence business and the date from which it conducts business or, as in this, allowed to conduct. It has to be understood that business does not conform to, metaphorically speaking, the “cold start” doctrine. There is, in most cases, hiatus between the time a person or entity is ready to do business and when business is conducted. During this period, expenses are incurred towards keeping the business primed up.

Gemological Institute of America Inc. vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax International Tax Circle 2(3), Mumbai (ITAT Mumbai)

The ITAT Mumbai Bench has explained the impact of an Advance Pricing Agreement being signed by the assessee’s Indian associated enterprises, namely GIA India Laboratory Pvt Ltd, with the Central Board of Direct Taxes, in terms of which a part of the royalty received by the assessee company from its Indian AE had to refund to the Indian AE. It has adjudicated the point whether the amount so refunded by the assessee company to its Indian AE, in terms of the APA terms, can still be taxed in the hands of the assessee company as its income.

Swami Keshwanand Sikshan Sansthan V/s ITO (ITAT Jaipur)

Proceedings u/s 148 quashed on non supply of reasons even on demand of the assessee and the approval given by the higher authorities is not in proper manner without application of mind.

Dy.CIT Circle-12(1)(1) vs. M/s. Aluvind Architectural Pvt. Ltd (ITAT Mumbai)

Exceptions in low Tax effect circular not applicable to Penalty appeals

Cadila Healthcare Limited Vs CST-Service Tax Ahmedabad(CESTAT Ahmedabad Bench)

When a partner can not render service to the partnership firm as they are treated as one and same, whether the erroneously paid service tax on self assessment is eligible for refund.  This judgement though pronounced in the light of law existing before 1-7-2012, will be helpful in dealing with issues regarding other types of refund claim paid erroneously under the service tax legislation.

Click here to upload your judgements and publish your articles

Regards,

 

Editor,

 

itatonline.org

---------------------

Latest:

Section 50C: A Step forward in curbing Black Money

By Advocate Amit Kumar Gupta: The Fictions in law are created only for some definite purpose and there application must be limited to that purpose only and should not be extended beyond that legitimate field. Also, the fundamental purpose behind introduction of section 50C was to counter the widely prevalent suppression of sale consideration on sale of immovable properties. The section 50C was introduced in the light of widespread belief that sale transactions of land and building are often undervalued resulting in leakage of legitimate tax revenues. But in actual scenario there can be variation between stamp duty value and the sale consideration because of many factors such as Location of property, nearby public amenities, Forced sale, Size of land and building, nearby public highway/Rail facilities, Shape of the plot or location etc. (pdf available for download)