Forum
Read and express views
× Latest Case Laws on Income Tax by various Income Tax Appellate Tribunals in India

These are the latest case laws decided by various Income Tax Appellate Tribunals (ITAT) of India on Income Tax which have been published recently. The case laws are open for discussion and we invite expert comments from our members on its applicability and effect on relevant issues.

05-09-2019, Glitz Builders, Section 115WB(2), 147, 268A, Tribunal Delhi

  • amit
  • amit's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Administrator
  • Administrator
More
1 week 1 day ago #10724 by amit
Section - 115WB(2), 147, 268A, 153A, 271(1)(c), 263
Order Date - 05-09-2019
Favouring - Revenue
Court - Tribunal Delhi
Appellant - ITO
Respondent - Glitz Builders Pvt. Ltd.
Justice - AMIT SHUKLA JM & ANADEE NATH MISSHRA AM
Citation - 919Taxpundit53
Appeal No. - ITA No:- 5793/Del/2016
Asstt. Year - 2011-12

Order

PER : AMIT SHUKLA

(A) The above captioned appeals by Revenue are taken up together for the sake of convenience and brevity and these appeals are hereby disposed off through this Consolidated Order; as in all these appeals the tax effect is less than the monetary limit fixed by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (“CBDT”, for short) in its Circular No. 17/2019 dated 08.08.2019. Grounds taken in these appeals of Revenue are as under:

ITA No.- 5793/Del/2016

“1. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in facts and in law in holding that no addition can be made in the assessment completed u/s 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, if no incriminating documents was found.

2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, CIT(A) has erred both in facts and law in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,27,44,100/- made by the Assessing Officer to the income of the assessee company.”

3. The appellant craves leave, to add, alter or amend any ground of appeal raised above at the time of the hearing.”

ITA No.- 5439/Del/2016

“1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 88,44,657/- made by the AO with regard to penalty / damages charged by Hero Honda.

2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not considering that the damages /penalty are not allowable as per Income ax Act,1961.

3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and in facts in no considering that the carrier trucks used by the assessee are insured and all the damages/penalty are to be borne by the insurance company not the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) has even erred in not taking considering of the AO’s remarks in his order that no proper reason have been put in place by the assessee during assessment proceedings.

4. Appellant craves right to add, delete, amend any ground at any time during the appellate proceedings. Certified that the copy of the order of Hon’ble CIT(A)-17, New Delhi in the above mentioned case was communicated on 01.09.2016. Limitation expires on 30/10/2016.”

ITA NO.- 5800/Del/2016

1. Whether on facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) is correct in deleting the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of Rs. 34,85,759/- rightly imposed by the AO for the A.Y. 2008-09.

2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) is correct in deleting the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of Rs. 34,85,759/- ignoring the facts of the case that the original order was not set aside in toto but only on a limited issue.

3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) is correct in deleting the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of Rs. 34,85,759/- gnoring the fact that the addition as made in the original order which were not subject to direction issued u/s 263 of the Act.

4. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) is correct in deleting the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of Rs. 34,85,759/- ignoring the fact the Assessing Officer deciding the matter in consequence of the order u/s 263 of the Act did not have the jurisdiction to reexamine the addition made in the original order u/s 143(3) / 153A and therefore did not have jurisdiction to reconsider/redecide on the initiation of penalty made in original assessment order u/s 143(3)/153A of the Act.

5. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) is correct in deleting the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of Rs. 34,85,759/- ignoring the fact the penalty so imposed by the AO is in consequence of the assessee’s appeal dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) which were filed against the original order and the same was not adjudicated by the assessee by filing second appeal.”

ITA NO.- 5801/Del/2016

1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case & in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was correct in deleting the add tion of Rs. 80,00,000/- on account of material consumed ignoring the fact that the assessee company failed to substantiate its claim of expenses during the course of assesseemnet proceedings.

2. The appellant craves leave, to add, alter or amend any ground of appeal raised above at the time of hearing.

ITA NO.- 3696/Del/2016

1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has er ed in quashing the reassessment proceedings initiated u/s 115WG of the IT Act thereby deleting addition of Rs. 1,04,74,439/- made by the AO on account of expenses under clause B section 115WB(2) of the I.T. Act without appreciating that the scheme of section 147 of the I.T. act, 1961 cannot be extended to the proceedings u/s 115WG of the Act.

2. The appellant craves, leave or reserving the right to amend, modify, alter, add or forego any ground(s) of appeal at any time before or during the hearing of this appeal.”

ITA No.- 3697/Del/2016

1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in quashing the reassessment proceedings initiated u/s 115WG

Click to view and download Full Free Judgement of ITO vs. Glitz Builders Pvt. Ltd.

Unable to display Google Map.




Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.138 seconds

If You Appreciate What We Do Here On TaxPundit, You Should Consider:

We are thankful for your never ending support.

Latest Analysis - High Courts

PCIT vs. Sahara States Gorakhpur

PCIT vs. Sahara States Gorakhpur

PCIT vs. Sahara States Gorakhpur Read More
GENPACT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED vs. DCIT

GENPACT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED vs. DCIT

GENPACT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED vs. DCIT Read More
Jugender Singh Yadav vs. PCIT

Jugender Singh Yadav vs. PCIT

Jugender Singh Yadav vs. PCIT Read More
ROHIT KUMAR GUPTA vs PCIT

ROHIT KUMAR GUPTA vs PCIT

ROHIT KUMAR GUPTA vs PCIT Read More
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  • 24
  • 25
  • 26
  • 27
  • 28
  • 29
  • 30
  • 31
  • 32
  • 33
  • 34
  • 35
  • 36
  • 37
  • 38
  • 39
  • 40
  • 41

Forum Features

Latest Case Laws
Latest Case Laws are instantly updated in the Forum into their respective section
Latest from CBDT
Latest Circulars, Notifications, Orders etc. from CBDT is updated in the Forum
Ask Experts
You can ask questions to the community
Support
Support queries are either replied via mail or in the Forum so that others can be benefited
Press Releases
Latest Press Notes and Press Releases are updated in the Forum
Connect with Members
You can connect with our community members by replying to their queries

Recommended Articles

 

SITE INFORMATION

All content herein is the copyright of Taxpundit. No images, text, or any other content may be, reproduced or redistributed without the express written consent of Taxpundit.

All Rights Reserved. All Content Copyright.

Newsletter

Subscribe to our newsletter and stay updated on the latest developments and special offers!

Company Master Data Since 1900. More than 1.75 Million Records. Register/Login to get FREE access. Read more
Toggle Bar