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

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 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...

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

Mariya Paliwala

Tags