Begin typing your search above and press return to search.
News Updates

Weekly Round Up Of Tax Cases : 1 May To 7 May, 2022

Mariya Paliwala
9 May 2022 2:46 AM GMT
Weekly Round Up Of Tax Cases : 1 May To 7 May, 2022
x

Supreme CourtSupreme Court Saves Over 90,000 Income Tax Reassessment NoticesIssued After 2021 Amendment By Deeming Them As Notices Under Section 148A Case Title: Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 444 The Supreme Court, on Wednesday, directed that reassessment notices under Section 148 of the unamended Income Tax Act which were issued beyond...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Saves Over 90,000 Income Tax Reassessment NoticesIssued After 2021 Amendment By Deeming Them As Notices Under Section 148A

Case Title: Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal

Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 444

The Supreme Court, on Wednesday, directed that reassessment notices under Section 148 of the unamended Income Tax Act which were issued beyond 01.04.2021 (the effective date of amendment of the said provision by the Finance Act, 2021) to be deemed to have been issued under Section 148A of the IT Act as substituted by the Finance Act, 2021 and be construed as show cause notices in terms of section 148A(b).

Equilibrium Between Power Of The Income Tax Dept. Of Reassessment And Rights Of The Assessee: Supreme Court

Case Title: Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 444

The Supreme Court, by invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, saved over 90,000 Income Tax Reassessment notices issued after the 2021 Amendment by deeming them as notices under Section 148A of the Income Tax Act.

Delhi High Court

Non Filing Of Response Due To Technical Glitch In E-Filing Portal: Delhi High Court Quashes The Order And Directs Fresh Hearing

Case Title: Ankit Kaul Versus National Faceless Assessment Centre

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 402

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Manmohan and Justice Subramonium Prasad has held that the taxpayer could not file a response under the Faceless Scheme due to a technical glitch in the e-filing portal.

Delhi High Court Upholds Order Of Revenue Department Imposing Enhanced Compounding Charges On Subsequent Offences

Case Title: M/s Maspar Industries Private Limited & Ors. versus Chief Commissioner of Income Tax TDS & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 411

The Delhi High Court has upheld the order of the revenue department imposing enhanced compounding charges on subsequent applications for compounding of offences relating to late deposit of Tax Deducted at Source (TDS).

Bombay High Court

Assessee Deprived Of Refund Due To Wrongful Withholding Of Amount By Income Tax Dept.: Bombay High Court Imposes 6% Interest

Case Title: Sanjeev Kumar Versus UOI

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 170

The Bombay High Court bench of Justice S.G. Mehare and Justice R.D. Dhanuka has allowed 6% interest to the assessee on wrongful withholding of the amount by the income tax department.

Bombay High Court Directs Assessee To Pay Rs.25,000 to Assessing Officer As The Stay Order Was Not Proactively Communicated

Case Title: Armstrong Pure Water Services Pvt. Ltd. Versus Union of India and others

The Bombay High Court bench of Justice N.R.Borkar and Justice K.R.Shriram held that the petitioner should have been proactive and promptly communicated the stay granted by the Court to the Assessing Officer so that he would have had enough time to make enquiries with his advocate and also check on the website about orders passed.

Madras High Court

Initiation Of Malicious Prosecution By Income Tax Dept. Abusing Power: Madras High Court

Case Title: Mrs. Noorjahan Versus The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 198

The Madras High Court bench of Justice G. Jayachandran has held that the suppression of material facts, the intentional suggestion of falsehood and the non-application of mind go to show that there was a malicious prosecution initiated by the Income Tax department by abusing its power. The petitioners need not be forced to undergo the ordeal of a trial, which has no legs to stand on.

No Excuse For Not PayingGST In Time From Its Electronic Cash Register: Madras High Court UpholdsInterest Demand

Case Title: M/s.Srinivasa Stampings Versus The Superintendent of GST and Central Excise

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 202

The Madras High Court bench of Justice C. Saravanan held that the taxpayer is liable to pay interest if there is a belated payment of tax declared in the returns filed.

Prosecution By Revenue Department Malicious And Patently Malafide, Madras High Court Quashes Complaint

Case Title: Mrs. Noorjahan versus Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax And M/s. AMK Solutions Private Ltd. & Ors. versus Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

The Madras High Court has quashed the complaints filed by the income tax department against the assessee for wilfully attempting to evade payment of tax under Section 276 C (2) of Income Tax Act, 1961 on the ground of malicious prosecution, non-application of mind and abuse of power.

Form GST DRC-16 Merely Attaches Immovable Properties & NotBank Account: Madras High Court Refuses To Quash Attachment Notice

Case Title: Tvl.G.Sankar Timber Depot Versus The State Tax Officer (Adjudication)

The Madras High Court bench of Justice C. Saravanan has held that form GST DRC-16 merely attaches immovable properties. There was no attachment to any bank accounts. The assessee appeared to be interested in dragging on the proceeding, though it appeared to be in arrears of huge amounts of tax.

Kerala High Court

Kerala High Court Directs GST Dept. To Facilitate Revision Of Form GST TRAN-1 By Making Necessary Arrangements On The Portal

Case Title: M/S G&C infra Innovations v. Union of india

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 209

The Kerala High Court bench of Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas has directed the GST department to facilitate the revising of Form GST TRAN-1 and filing of Form GST TRAN-2 by making necessary arrangements on the web portal.

Allahabad High Court

Reassessment Order Not Valid If Notice By Assessing Authority Is Without Jurisdiction: Allahabad HighCourt

Case Title: Uphill Farms Private Limited Versus UOI

The Allahabad High Court bench of Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani and Justice Jayant Banerji has ruled that once the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, issued by the assessing authority was declared without jurisdiction, the subsequent proceedings, including the re-assessment order, cannot be sustained.

Gujarat High Court

Reassessment Should Only Be Done By Officer Or His Successor And Not By Any Officer Of The Same Rank : Gujarat High Court

Case Title: Messrs Aztec Fluids And Machinery Pvt. Ltd. Versus UOI

The Gujarat High Court bench of Justice Sonia Gokani and Justice Rajendra M. Saraen, while invalidating the reassessment initiated by the DRI, held that the officer who did the assessment could only undertake reassessment.

Income Tax Not Applicable On Interest Awarded By The Motor Accident Claim Tribunal: Gujarat High Court

Case Title: Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax (TDS)

The Gujarat High Court bench of Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice Nisha M. Thakore has held that the interest awarded by the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal (MACT) under section 171 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 is not taxable under the Income Tax Act, 1961.

GST Refund To Be Granted To The Entity Who Borne The Tax Burden: Gujarat High Court Allows GST Refund To Service Recipient

Case Title: Munjaal Manishbhai Bhatt Versus Union Of India

The Gujarat High Court bench of Justice J.B.Pardiwala and Justice Nisha M.Thakore has held that, as per Section 54 of the CGST Act, a claim of refund may be made directly by the recipient if he has borne the burden of tax.

Chhattisgarh High Court

Wrongful Availment Of ITC:Chhattisgarh High Court Refuses Bail

Case Title: Paritosh Kumar Singh Versus State Of Chhattisgarh

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Chh) 36

The Chhattisgarh High Court bench headed by Chief Justice Arup Kumar Goswami and Justice Gautam Chourdiya has refused to grant bail to a person allegedly involved in availment of fraudulent Input Tax Credit (ITC).

ITAT

Additions Cannot Be Made To Assessee's Income On Basis Of Document Declared By The CESTAT As 'Dumb Document': Ahmedabad ITAT

Case Title: Rajesh Sajjanraj Bafna versus D.C.I.T.

The Ahmedabad Bench of ITAT has ruled that additions cannot be made to assessee's taxable income under the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the basis of documents that are declared as 'dumb documents' by the CESTAT in the service tax proceedings before it.

Assessing Officer Cannot Apply Wrong Method In Absence Of Audited Financials Of AE: Delhi ITAT

Case Title: M/s Olympus Medical Systems India Pvt. Ltd. Versus DCIT

The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) consisting of Yogesh Kumar (Judicial Member) and Dr. B.R.R. Kumar (Accountant Member) has held that the AO cannot give benefit to the assessee for non-cooperation in providing audited financials of associated enterprises (AE).

Capital Gain Exemption Can't Be Denied To Wife For Mere Presence of Husband's Name In Purchase Document: ITAT

Case Title: Y. Manjula Reddy Vs. ITO

The Banglore Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) headed by N.V. Vasudevan (Vice-President) and B.R. Baskaran (Accountant Member) has ruled that the capital gain exemption cannot be denied to the wife for the mere presence of the husband's name in the purchase document.

AAR

Computer Software Supplied To Public Funded Research Institutions Attracts 5% GST: Karnataka AAR

Applicant's Name: Keysight Technologies India Pvt. Ltd.

The Karnataka Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR), consisting of members Dr. M.P.Ravi Prasad and T.Kiran Reddy, has ruled that 5% GST is payable on computer software supplied to public-funded research institutions.

No GST Leviable In The Hands Of Employer On Amount Representing Employees Portion of canteen charges: Gujarat AAR

Applicant' Name: M/s. Cadila Healthcare Limited

The Gujarat Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) consisting of members Atul Mehta and Arun Richard ruled that no GST is leviable in the hands of the employer on an amount representing the employee portion of canteen charges.

Dismantling Of Existing Sleeper And Installation Of New Sleepers For Railways Attracts 12% GST: WestBengal AAR

Applicant's Name: Utkarsh India Limited

The West Bengal Authority of Advance (AAR), consisting of members Brajesh Kumar Singh and Joyjit Banik, has ruled that the dismantling of existing sleeper fixings and/or installation of H-Bean Steel sleepers amounts to the execution of original work and would attract 12% GST.

Transfer Of Business Unit Shall Be Treated As A Supply Of Services: West Bengal AAR

Applicant's Name: Cosmic Ferro Alloys Limited

The West Bengal Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR), consisting of members Brajesh Kumar Singh and Joyjit Banik, has ruled that the transfer of business units shall be treated as a supply of services.

Composite Supply Of Hospital Construction Works For Govt Entity Attracts 18% GST: Maharashtra AAR

Applicant's Name: KPC Projects Ltd.

The Maharashtra Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR), consisting of members Rajiv Magoo and T.R. Ramnani, has ruled that 18% GST is payable on the composite supply of hospital construction works for government entities.

Next Story