|
Advanced Search Options
Income Tax - High Court - Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 52652 Records
More information of case laws are visible to the Subscriber of a package i.e:-
Party Name, Court Name, Date of Decision, Full Text of Headnote & Decision etc.
- 2020 (3) TMI 1177
Liability to pay interest tax on the interest earned - HELD THAT:- Controversy involved in the present case would clearly stand covered by the decision of this court in the case of Asman Investment Limited v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax [2018 (2) TMI 1966 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] Under the circumstances, it is not necessary to deal with the facts and contentions in detail. Question is answered in the affirmative, that is, in favour of the revenue and against the appellant assessee. It is held that in the facts and under the circumstances of this case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the appellant is liable to pay interest tax on the interest earned by it.
- 2020 (3) TMI 1176
Stay petition - applications for interim stay - Demand of the assessment as per the provisions of Section 220(6) - HELD THAT:- This court while dealing in such matters, have come across many writ petitions preferred by the assessees, seeking intervention of this court under Art.226 for issue for direction and taking up applications for interim stay filed along with pending appeals. Even this court was apprised that the Appellate Authority are taking up the appeals, considering the predicament of such assessees including the petitioner, the directions having been issued, for consideration of at least interim In the instant case appeal filed has not been taken up rather the interim application, in such circumstances availed the remedy under Sec.220(6) 1961 Act, which resulted into impugned order Ext.P7, the order prima facie do not reflect ....... + More
- 2020 (3) TMI 1175
Offence u/s 276(c) (2) - willful failure on the part of the petitioner for non payment of huge tax liability - accused has not paid the huge tax liability at the time of filing the return of income - intention from the petitioner for willful evading of payment of tax - HELD THAT:- On perusal of the documents, it is seen that the last date for filing the returns for the financial year 2012-2013 was on or before 05.08.2013. The respondent did not hand over the book of accounts seized from the petitioner ill 05.08.2013. Therefore, there is three months delay in payment of income tax and the petitioner filed return of income on 31.01.2014. Thereafter, it was returned on 31.03.2015 directing the petitioner to pay a sum of ₹ 4,08,04,345/-. Thereafter, the petitioner paid tax as demanded by the respondent on 13.03.2018, for which the respo....... + More
- 2020 (3) TMI 1174
Stay petition - recovery proceedings - Freezing of bank account - petitioner's appeal is pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the petitioner was required to deposit 20% of the outstanding amount - HELD THAT:- As stated that applications were preferred on 10/2/2020 and 28/2/2020 informing the Commissioner of Income Tax that 20% of the outstanding demand has already been recovered by the Department and, therefore, the other bank accounts may not be freezed. Respondent Department has fairly stated before this Court that some breathing time be granted to the Department to decide the applications preferred in the matter. Resultantly, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent Department to pass appropriate order keeping in view the amount already recovered and the outstanding amount which ....... + More
- 2020 (3) TMI 1146
Proceeding undertaken under Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015 - Due to the prevailing situation of the pandemic COVID-19 and Resolution of the Bar Counsel of West Bengal directing the lawyers not to appear in any judicial proceedings, none of the Counsel are present to assist the Court - HELD THAT:- This matter needs to be heard properly with the assistance of the Counsel appearing on behalf of both the parties. Assessment order that has been passed subsequent to the filing of the writ petition is required to be stayed for a limited period of time only. In the light of the same, I direct the authorities not to take any coercive step in pursuance of the assessment order that had been passed. The assessment order is also stayed for the time being to prevent the limitation period for filing a....... + More
- 2020 (3) TMI 1145
Subsidy pursuant to a scheme formulated and implemented by the Government for promotion of construction of Cinema Halls and support the film industry - revenue or capital subsidy - character of the receipt - HELD THAT:- As decided in SAHNEY STEEL AND PRESS WORKS LIMITED AND OTHERS VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX [1997 (9) TMI 3 - SUPREME COURT] if the monies are given to an assessee for assisting him for carrying out the business operation and the money is given only after and conditional upon commencement of the production, such subsidies must be treated as assistance for the purpose of trade. Applying the said legal position to the given case, the purpose of the scheme as evident from Annexure A/2, and in particular Rule 1, is obviously for promoting the construction of new Cinema Theaters. The effective date is given under Rule 3, as....... + More
- 2020 (3) TMI 1119
Non remittence of TDS in time - penal action initiated by the Income Tax Department against the petitioners - criminal proceedings - HELD THAT:- The petitioners Company M/s.Vasan Health Care Private Limited has not remitted the TDS in time. It has partially remitted with interest but still remittence of TDS is due. Mere representation to defer action will not and cannot stop the authorities proceeding in accordance to law. The interim relief granted to the petitioners is to operate the bank account with minimum balance of ₹ 1.62 Crores by itself an indication that the petitioners have not cleared the entire due. Even otherwise, the interim order of the Court dated 08.01.2016, goes to show that only after the coercive measure of freezing the petitioners account, the Income Tax Department were able to recover about ₹ 8 Crores. W....... + More
- 2020 (3) TMI 1118
Seizure of money - release the money in interim custody - HELD THAT:- An application filed by the appellant seeking interim custody of the money was already declined and a revision petition filed against the said order is pending disposal before the Sessions Court. Evidently, now the Income Tax Department is in seisen of the matter and had already initiated 'centralization proceedings'. They are now keeping custody of the money based on an order passed by the Magistrate's Court. It is for the appellant to approach the appropriate authority in the Income Tax Department claiming ownership and release of the amount, pending finalization of the proceedings, on adducing proof with respect to its ownership. They can also purse the remedy of revision petition filed before the Sessions Court. This court, by exercising the powers veste....... + More
- 2020 (3) TMI 1117
Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - reasons for re-opening the assessment - deduction u/s 80JJAA as claimed by the petitioner - change of opinion or not? - HELD THAT:- Whether the notice that has been issued to the petitioner was on account of change of opinion or on account of failure on the part of the petitioner to fully and truly disclose all material required for the assessment is to be determined by the Assessing Officer while passing order under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In the facts of the case, though the petitioner had furnished certain details at the time of re-assessment, the question still remains to be answered is whether there was full and true disclosure by the petitioner as is contemplated under proviso to Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In this case, mere filing to the annexure by the petitioner in ....... + More
- 2020 (3) TMI 1116
Unexplained cash purchase - information received from the Customs Authorities - notice was issued for enhancement of income and served on the AR asking the assessee to give his explanation within 15 days, however, till date the assessee neither submitted the explanation nor requested for more time to submit the explanation - main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the second respondent, without applying his mind independently, has issued the impugned notice relying on the report of the Assessment Officer, which is arbitrary and illegal and on this score alone, the impugned notice is liable to be quashed - HELD THAT:- Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and having regard to the submissions now made by the learned counsel on either side, this Court permits the petitioner to submit the necessary obje....... + More
- 2020 (3) TMI 1115
Correct head of income - interest received under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - part take the character of the compensation and would fall under the head “Capital gains” or “Income from other sources” - HELD THAT:- The scheme with regard to chargeability of interest received on compensation and enhanced compensation has undergone a sea change with the insertion of Sections 56(2)(viii) and 57(iv) of the 1961 Act. Section 56 deals with income from other sources and a specific provision has been inserted by way of sub-section 2(viii), whereby the interest received on compensation or enhanced compensation, as referred to in clause (b) to Section 145A has been included under the head 'Income from other sources'. In clause (iv) to Section 57, deduction of fifty per cent is provided on interest rec....... + More
- 2020 (3) TMI 1089
Money seized in search - seeking order or direction directing the 1st respondent to release and disburse to the petitioner, the amount withheld illegally - HELD THAT:- First respondent had earlier filed appeal before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Pattambi under Section 451 of Cr.P.C and under section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for getting the custody of the amount seized by the 2nd respondent to the Income Tax Department, which was allowed by the learned Magistrate. It is also equally not in dispute, that aggrieved by the said order rendered by the learned Magistrate, the petitioner has preferred a Crl.Revision Petition which is now pending before the Sessions Court, Palakkad. Since the legality and correctness of the said issue decided by the learned Magistrate in giving custody of the seized amount to the 2nd responden....... + More
- 2020 (3) TMI 1084
Stay of demand - Recovery proceedings - HELD THAT:- It may be mentioned that petitioner has already paid ₹ 1,11,50,905.00 as part of the outstanding dues, ofcourse without prejudice to its rights and contentions. Without expressing any opinion on merit, we feel that it would be in the interest of justice if the first appellate authority hears the appeal filed by the petitioner and decides the same in accordance with law within a period of four months from the date of receipt of an authenticated copy of the order. Ordered accordingly.Till decision is rendered on the appeal of the petitioner by the first appellate authority within the period specified, there shall be stay of the demand notice issued pursuant to the assessment order dated 28th December, 2019.
- 2020 (3) TMI 1083
Submission of details of Deduction of Tax at Source on the amount deposited by the petitioner with the second respondent in Term Deposit - capital gain accounts - Form - 26AS, instead of Form No.16-A to the Income Tax Department, first respondent herein and issue a certificate to the petitioner under Section 203AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 within stipulated time - HELD THAT:- 1st respondent, based on instruction, submitted that though it is true that the Bank has deducted tax from the petitioner's account and paid to the Income Tax Department, the Bank did not generate Form 26A and therefore, such payment has not reflected in the records maintained by the 1st respondent. However, as the Bank has given the Manual Form 16A to the petitioner, he can approach the 1st respondent by making appropriate application by enclosing Form 16A for....... + More
- 2020 (3) TMI 1082
Deduction u/s 10A - Whether expenditure in foreign currency was not incurred for the purpose of export of software and therefore, should not be reduced from export turnover? - ITAT setting aside disallowance and held that the said amount has to be treated as part of export turnover - HELD THAT:- From perusal of the order passed by the Tribunal, we find that the Tribunal has followed the decision of this court in the case of ‘CIT VS. M/S HEWLETT PACKARD GLOBAL SOFT LTD. [2017 (11) TMI 205 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] . Thus, the order passed by the Tribunal does not suffer from any infirmity. No substantial question of law.
- 2020 (3) TMI 1081
Condonation of delay in filing returns of the income tax for the assessment years - proof of genuine hardship which caused the delay in filing returns - HELD THAT:- Incidents in the petitioner's family is a great tragedy inasmuch as his daughter who was then only 2 years old, was diagnosed with a serious cancerous ailment and he had to run from hospitals to hospitals for treatment of his child and that it is only in view of the extreme mental strain and the circumstances under which the petitioner was forced to divert his energies solely for the purpose of treatment of his child, that the delay has occurred. True, that the petitioner could not concentrate on his business activities, which resulted in the delay in submissions of the returns, but the same occurred only due to these circumstances and that the department has no case that ....... + More
- 2020 (3) TMI 1080
Exemption u/s 11 - denial of exemption as assessee trust is for benefit of a Sindhi community - Tribunal held that for granting registration u/s 12AA only 'nature of its object' and 'genuineness of the activities' of the trust are to be considered, even when the very basis and very object of creation of the trust was hit by the prohibition provided under Section 13(1) (b) - HELD THAT:- Referring to clauses of the trust deed, it cannot be said the trust is only religious trust. Thus, finding arrived at by the CIT that the objects of the trust were only for the benefit of a Sindhi community, is not correct. CIT was therefore not justified in rejecting registration of the Trust holding that the activities were carried out only for religious purposes as it would be the task of the Assessing Officer to be undertaken at the time....... + More
- 2020 (3) TMI 1034
Unaccounted income - Deemed income - Advance money received or determining income earned from transaction - assessee had failed to bring on record any agreement/contract essential to ascertain the genuineness of transaction or adduce evidence in support that no surplus was generated - HELD THAT:- From the table reproduced, it is evident that unsecured loan was given to Sh. Sudhir Chadha and investment of ₹ 1,00,00,000/- was made in the project of M/s Gulmohar Landcon Pvt. Ltd. It was claimed that ₹ 79,00,000/- was invested with Sh. Darshan Singh who declined the said investment. There was one entry of advance made to Smt. Sumti Devi for purchase of land, it is worth noting that ₹ 55,00,000/- was paid in cash. The appellate authority while deleting the addition has taken a tubular vision of the issue involved. The only ba....... + More
- 2020 (3) TMI 1033
Exemption u/s 11 - Use of accumulated income for different purpose - Treating the amount given to PSWHMMS as the income of the appellant-society in terms of section 11(3)(d) - appellant is a Society working under the Government of Punjab, same being principal donor also - HELD THAT:- In the present case, it was not the claim of the appellant that the amount was being accumulated for the payment to PSWHMMS. At this stage, we are not dilating as to whether for such purpose there could be accumulation or not. In such circumstances, there is a clear violation of the conditions referred in sub-section (2) and sub-section (3) of section 11. The amount has been spent for the purpose other than for what it was accumulated, it comes within the mischief of section 11(3)(c). The second limb of the argument raised is that by adding explanation to sub....... + More
- 2020 (3) TMI 1032
Stay petition - Recovery proceedings - Grievance of the petitioner is that without taking any decision on the stay application of the petitioner, respondent No.1 has attached the above three bank accounts of the petitioner by issuing garnishee notices under Section 226(3) - HELD THAT:- We feel that it would meet the ends of justice if respondent No.1 takes a decision on the stay application of the petitioner in accordance with law within a period of 10 days from the date of receipt of an authenticated copy of this order. Ordered accordingly. Till the stay application is decided, there shall be no further withdrawal of money from the above three bank accounts of the petitioner and whatever withdrawals have been made, the same shall be subject to such order that may be passed by respondent No.1 in terms of the present order. Attachment of t....... + More
........
|
