Sunday, September 11, 2011

Some recent past case. (Favor Revenue)

2011-TIOL-89-SC-IT + it sc story : - ITO Vs M/s Mangat Ram Norata Ram Narwana (Dated: May 5, 2011 )

Income tax - Sections 142(1), 143(3), 148, 271(1)(a) & (c), 276C, 277, 278 - Whether, for the purpose of prosecution, it is statutorily required of the partner of the assessee-firm to sign the revised return showing higher income and leading to imposition of penalty - Whether when the partner fails to raise the issue of not signing the revised return and the assessee-firm pays up the penalty imposed, such acts impliedly amounts to admission for the purpose of prosecution.- Revenue's appeal allowed: SUPREME COURT
2011-TIOL-529-HC-AHM-IT : - Dy.CIT Vs Pradip N Desai (Dated: July 6, 2011)

Income Tax - Section 32 - Whethe the depreciation at the rate of 50% can be claimed in respect of vehicles given on lease. - Revenue's appeal allowed : GUJARAT HIGH COURT
2011-TIOL-533-HC-AHM-IT : - CIT, Ahmedabad Vs Gurukrupa Developers (Dated: July 27, 2011)

Income Tax - Section 113 - Whether the proviso to Section 113 which is in respect to the surcharge on the undisclosed income is clarificatory in nature. - Revenue's appeal allowed: GUJARAT HIGH COURT

2011-TIOL-543-HC-AHM-IT : - CIT Vs Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd (Dated: August 8, 2011)

Income tax – Section 12A, 13(3) – Whether once the CIT grants approval for registration of the trust u/s 12A, the AO is not required to re-examine the entire question of the object and purpose of the trust even though the approval was given with the said condition as the CIT cannot keep the very foundational issue open to be judged by the AO – Whether when there is no conclusion that any part of the funds were diverted or applied as not permitted under sub-section (3) of Section 13, the exemption cannot be denied only on the basis of some irregularities observed by SEBI in managing the funds of the trust. - Revenue's appeal dismissed : GUJARAT HIGH COURT
2011-TIOL-519-HC-DEL-IT : - CIT, Delhi Vs Industrial Finance Corporation Of India Ltd (Dated: July 11, 2011)

Income tax – Sections 36(1)(viia)(c), 36(1)(vii), 41(4A) – Whether the deduction claimed for the special reserve can be disallowed for an amount which is transferred from special reserve account to other account as per the amendment in section 36(1)(viii) which required to also maintain the amount in the reserve account though it is not retrospective – Whether the assessee is entitled to claim deduction for the amount of interest offered on NPA account which is not realized. - Revenue's appeal allowed: DELHI HIGH COURT
2011-TIOL-519-HC-DEL-IT : - CIT, Delhi Vs Industrial Finance Corporation Of India Ltd (Dated: July 11, 2011)

Income tax – Sections 36(1)(viia)(c), 36(1)(vii), 41(4A) – Whether the deduction claimed for the special reserve can be disallowed for an amount which is transferred from special reserve account to other account as per the amendment in section 36(1)(viii) which required to also maintain the amount in the reserve account though it is not retrospective – Whether the assessee is entitled to claim deduction for the amount of interest offered on NPA account which is not realized. - Revenue's appeal allowed: DELHI HIGH COURT
2011-TIOL-559-HC-KAR-IT : - CIT, Bangalore Vs Dr T K Dayalu (Dated: June 20, 2011)

Income Tax - Section 2(47)(v), 45, 143(2) – Whether, in respect of development agreement, the relevant date for attracting capital gain is the date on which possession is handed over to the developer or the date of completion of the project. - Revenue's appeal allowed : KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
2011-TIOL-564-HC-KAR-IT : - CIT, Bangalore Vs M/s Ganjam Nagappa And Sons (HUF) (Dated: May 26, 2011)

Income Tax - Sections 147, 148 - Whether the Tribunal can interfere with the concurrent findings on the question of fact when no cogent reasons are given for interfering. - Revenue's appeal allowed : KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
2011-TIOL-536-HC-MAD-IT : - CIT, Madurai Vs K A S Mathivanan (Dated: August 1, 2011)

Income Tax - Whether allowance can be made merely because future payments were made out of the funds said to be kept in the suspense account - Revenue's appeal allowed : MADRAS HIGH COURT
2011-TIOL-496-HC-P&H-IT : - CIT, Chandigarh Vs Sanjay Chhabra (Dated: March 31, 2011)

Income tax – Sections 69, 133A – Unexplained Investment – Whether when the assessee fails to rebut the unexplained investment in the purchase of fuits, and the CIT(A) and Tribunal fail to record the fact that such entries were made in the books, the addition made by the AO is sustainable. - Revenue's appeal allowed : PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT;
2011-TIOL-567-HC-P&H-IT : - CIT Vs Mukta Metal Works (Dated: February 28, 2011)

Income Tax – Section 158BC, 158BD - Whether the office note appended to section 158BC constitutes a valid satisfaction note within the parameter of section 158BD of the Act – Whether any inference could be drawn from the entries in the seized diary during search, so as to make additions on account of undisclosed income - Whether the Tribunal is duty bound to consider the additional evidence in the form of report of forensic science laboratory in the interest of justice if the same is authentic and necessary for the decision of the issue raised before it.- Revenue's appeal allowed : PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

No comments:

Post a Comment