Direct Tax Cases Quarterly Digest 2024
Live LawSupreme Court Case Title: Herbicides India Limited vs ACIT 2024 LiveLaw 44 While setting aside the Rajasthan High Court orders, the Supreme Court restored the assessee's appeals by condoning the delay in filing the paper-book before High Court and observed that the assessee is entitled to have his appeals heard on merits. AO Lacks Jurisdiction To Pass Draft Assessment Order In Absence Of " Any Variation In Income Or Loss ": Delhi High Court Case Title: The Commissioner Of Income Tax - International Taxation Versus S.A.Chitra Ventures Ltd. Citation: 2024 LiveLaw 211 The Delhi High Court has held that the AO, under Section 144C of the Income Tax Act, would have no jurisdiction to pass a draft assessment order in the absence of "any variation in the income or loss returned," which is prejudicial to the interest of the assessee. Reopening Of Assessment Inspired From 'Review' & 'Change Of Opinion' By Subsequent AO Is Deprecated: Madras HC Case Title: BNY Mellon Technology Private Limited Vs Additional / Joint / Deputy / Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Citation: 2024 LiveLaw 12 While setting aside the order disposing of the assessee's objection to re-opening of the assessment pursuant to the issue of notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the consequent reassessment order, the Madras High Court held that there is no scope for re-opening the assessment, since the reasons cited for same was inspired from change of opinion of the Assessing officer. Rajasthan High Court Case Title: G R Infraprojects Limited Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax Citation: Citation: 2024 LiveLaw 3 The Rajasthan High Court has held that once the deduction claim for education cess is withdrawn, the assessee is immune from the imposition of a penalty under Section 270A of the Income Tax Act. Case Title: Chambal Fertilizers and Chemicals Limited Versus Office of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Citation: Citation: 2024 LiveLaw 4 The Rajasthan High Court has held that the department's action of denying the benefit of immunity on the ground that the penalty was initiated under Section 270A of the Income Tax Act for misreporting of income is not only erroneous but also arbitrary and bereft of any reason, as in the penalty notice, the respondents have failed to specify the limb, "under-reporting" or "misreporting" of income, under which the penalty proceedings had been initiated.