Allahabad High Court Annual Tax Digest 2025

Direct Tax[Income Tax] Filing Of Form 10-IC Prior To Filing Of Return Not Mandatory, Delay May Be Condoned In “Genuine Hardship”: Allahabad High CourtCase Title: CELL COM TELESERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED v. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERSCase no.: WRIT TAX NO. 278 OF 2024The Allahabad High Court has held that filing of Form 10-IC prior to filing of income tax return is not mandatory and the delay in filing the Form may be condoned in cases where “genuine hardship” is shown to exist.Form 10-IC, under the Income Tax Act, is required to filed only if a Domestic Company chooses to pay tax at concessional rate of 22% under Section 115BAA of the Income Tax Act,1961. Section 115BAA provides that subject to the provisions of Chapter XII of the Income Tax Act, a domestic company may choose to compute its income tax at 22% for any previous year relevant to the assessment year beginning on or after the 1st day of April, 2020 provided the conditions mentioned in Section 115BAA(2) are fulfilled.Burden To Prove That Best Assessment By Income Tax Authorities Is Perverse Is On Assesee: Allahabad High CourtCase Title: M/S Rai Wines Ras Bahar Colony v. The Commisssioner Of Income TaxCase no.: INCOME TAX APPEAL No. - 395 of 2007The Allahabad High Court has held that the burden to prove that the findings of best assessment done by the authorities is perverse is on the assesee.The bench of Justice Shekhar B. Saraf and Justice Praveen Kumar Giri held that “when a best assessment is done, it is for the assessee to bring on record the facts that may reveal that the findings are perverse in nature.”Notice U/S 148 Income Tax Act Must Be Delivered To Addressee Personally By Post To Complete Service U/S 27: Allahabad High CourtCase Title: Mahesh Gautam v. Commissioner Of Income TaxCase no.: INCOME TAX APPEAL No. - 436 of 2012The Allahabad High Court has held that notices under Section 148 and 282 of the Income tax Act, 1961 must be delivered to the assesee personally through speed post and not merely upon his address to complete service under Section 27 of the General Clauses Act, 1897.It held that presumption of sufficient service arises only when the notice is sent by registered post as in registered post the notice is delivered to the person it is addressed to. Highlighting the difference between registered post and speed post, the Court held that service will be deemed sufficient when sent through speed post only if it has been delivered to the addressee him/herself and not upon the address to a different person.Taxpayer Cannot Be Left At Mercy Of Assessing Officer Who Chooses To Delay Payment Of Genuine Refunds: Allahabad High CourtCase Title: U.P. Rajya Nirman Sahakari Sangh Limited Versus Union Of India Min.Of Finance Dept.Of Revenue Thru.Secy.AndorsCase no.: WRIT - C No. - 16125 of 2018While dealing with a writ petition for refund of Tax Deducted at Source (TDS), the Allahabad High Court has held that when the documents for TDS are provided by the assesee, the Assessing Officer must process the refund and cannot delay payment of refund in genuine cases.The bench of Justice Shekhar B. Saraf and Justice Prashant Kumar held, “a taxpayer should not be left at the mercy of an Assessing Officer who chooses to delay the payment of genuine refunds. Furthermore, as long as the assessee is able to provide documents proving that tax has been deducted at source, the same has to be accepted by the Assessing Officer, who cannot insist that the amount match the figures in Form 26AS. It is the responsibility of the Assessing Officer to verify the amounts provided by the assessee through the proof of Form 16A.”Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Cannot Pass Ex-Parte Orders Without Recording Reasons For Denying Adjournment: Allahabad High CourtCase Title: Ashok Kumar Agarwal v. The Assistant Commissioner of Income TaxCase no.: INCOME TAX APPEAL No. - 77 of 2025While hearing an appeal under S. 260A of the Income Tax Act, the Allahabad High Court has held that the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal cannot reject adjournment applications and pass ex-parte orders without recording reasons for such dismissal. It was held that if the Tribunal was allowed to do such a thing, it would hamper the right of the parties to a reasonable opportunity of hearing.“While inordinate delays in judicial decision making is not healthy and expeditious disposal of the proceedings is a goal that all Courts, Tribunals and Authorities may pursue, at the same time, they may remain conscious of their non-negotiable commitment to afford reasonable opportunity of hearing to the parties before such judicial decision making is achieved,” held the division bench comprising Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh and Justice Indrajeet Shukla.Indirect TaxNOIDA Authorities Deposited Party's Tax Under Wrong Head: Allahabad HC Directs Compensation To Assessee For Penalty Imposed U/S 73 Of GST ActCase Title: Surender Gupta vs. Appellate Authority State Gst / Additional Commissioner Grade-Ii And 2 OthersCase no.:...

Allahabad High Court Annual Tax Digest 2025

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags