Direct Tax Cases Monthly Round Up: May 2024

Supreme CourtInterest-Free/Concessional Loans To Bank Employees Taxable As Perquisite : Supreme Court Upholds Rule 3(7)(I) Of Income Tax RulesCase Name- All India Bank Officers' Confederation Vs The Regional Manager, Central Bank Of India & OthersCitation : 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 352A Division bench of the Supreme Court comprising of Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Dipankar Datta while deciding a Civil Appeal in the case of All India Bank Officers' Confederation Vs The Regional Manager, Central Bank Of India & Others has held that Rule 3(7)(i) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 is not violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and provision of interest free/concessional loan benefits provided by banks to bank employees shall be taxable as a perquisite under Section 17 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.Delhi High CourtEligible Industrial Undertakings Carrying Out Manufacturing Activity Is Only Essential Requisite For Claiming Benefit Of Sec 80IC: Delhi High CourtCase Title: CIT verses Dabur India LtdThe Delhi High Court dismisses Revenue's appeal against ITAT's order in case of Dabur India Ltd., while reiterating that for purpose of deduction u/s 80IB & 80IC of the Income tax Act, the only essential requisite is that the eligible industrial undertakings should be carrying out manufacture or production of articles or things.Income Tax Dept. To Allow Personal Hearing Through National Faceless Assessment Centre On Assessee's Request: Delhi High CourtCase Title: Global Vectra Helicorp Limited Versus Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, DelhiThe Delhi High Court has held that the income tax department should allow personal hearings through the national faceless assessment centre on the assessee's request.No Proceedings Under PMLA Could Be Sustained After Acquittal Of Accused: Delhi High CourtCase Title: Directorate Of Enforcement Versus Akhilesh SinghThe Delhi High Court has held that no proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) could be sustained after the acquittal of the accused in the predicate offence.AO Can't Proceed With Assessment In Absence Of Section 127 Transfer Order: Delhi High CourtCase Title: Rajsheela Growth Fund (P) Ltd. Versus ITOThe Delhi High Court has held that the Assessing Officer cannot proceed with assessment in the absence of a transfer order under Section 127 of the Income Tax Act.Assessee Can't Be Obstructed From Availing DTVSV Act Benefits Even When Limitation Period For Appeal Hasn't Expired: Delhi High CourtCase Title: PT Bukaka Teknik Utama Versus Commissioner Of Income Tax (IT), Delhi - 2The Delhi High Court has held that the assessee can't be obstructed from availing of the benefits of the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 (DTVSV Act) even where the time limit for an appeal has not expired.'Co-Ordinated Investigation' For Prevention Of Tax Evasion Is Good Ground For Transfer: Delhi HC Refuses To Interfere With Transfer Order U/s 127Case Title: Dollar Gulati Vs PCIT and OrsThe Delhi High Court refuses to interfere with the order of the AO passed u/s 127 where the case of the Taxpayer was centralized and transferred from Income-tax Officer (ITO), Delhi to Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (DCIT), Central Circle, Haryana.Grant Of Section 153D Approval Can't Be Merely Ritualistic Formality, Rather It Must Reflect Appropriate Application Of Mind: Delhi High CourtCase Title: Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -15 Versus Shiv Kumar NayyarThe Delhi High Court has held that a grant of approval under Section 153D of the Income Tax Act, 1961, cannot be merely a ritualistic formality or rubber stamping by the authority; rather, it must reflect an appropriate application of mind.Once TPO Passed Order, AO Obliged To Pass An Assessment Order In Accordance With Section 92CA(4): Delhi High CourtCase Title: New Delhi Television Limited Versus Dispute Resolution Panel 2 & AnrThe Delhi High Court has held that once the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) had proceeded to pass the order of October 17, 2017, all that the AO was obliged to do was pass an assessment order in accordance with the procedure prescribed in Section 92CA(4) of the Income Tax Act.Bombay High CourtSanctioning Authority Has To Be PCCIT For Issuing Reopening Notice After Expiry Of Three Years: Bombay High CourtCase Title: Balkrishna Barsha Sutar Versus The Income Tax OfficerThe Bombay High Court has held that the sanctioning authority has to be the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (PCCIT) for issuing a reopening notice after the expiry of three years.Income Tax Authority Should Refrain From Over Analysis Which Leads To Paralysis Of Justice: Bombay High CourtCase Title: Bhatewara Associates Versus Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Pune & Ors.The Bombay High Court, while setting aside the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), held that the authority should refrain from overanalyzing, which leads to paralysis of justice.Capital Gain Tax Not Payable On Transfer Of Shares By Way...

Direct Tax Cases Monthly Round Up: May 2024

Mariya Paliwala

Tags