Blog Categories
Subscribe to Newsletter
Join our subscribers list to get the latest Tax Updates and Opportunities.
Knowledge Portal
Click here to explore deep insights, FAQs, and comprehensive tax guides.
Explore Now
Showing filtered results. Clear filters
Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Pawan Gupta (and Connected Matters) — Ultimate Tax Jurisprudence on Mandatory Service of Section 143(2) Notice in Block Assessments Under Chapter XIV-B
Facts of the Case
A
batch of appeals was preferred by the Revenue (with CIT v. Pawan Gupta
serving as the lead matter) against a common order passed by the
Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) pertain...
Distinguishing Curable Irregularities from Fundamental Defects: An In-depth Analysis of the Delhi High Court’s Ruling in CIT vs. Haryana Sheet Glass Ltd. and the Application of Section 140 of the Income Tax Ac
Facts of the Case
The
respondent-assessee (Haryana Sheet Glass Ltd.) filed its original income
tax return on November 1, 2004, declaring a loss of ₹10,38,98,405/-. This
return was signed and verifie...
Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Pawan Gupta (and Connected Batches) – Mandatoriness of Section 143(2) Scrutiny Notice in Block Assessment Proceedings under Chapter XIV-B of the Income Tax Act, 1961
Facts of the CaseA batch of appeals was preferred by the Revenue against a
common order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) concerning
various assessees belonging to the same group. CIT vs. Pawan Gupta w...
Denso Haryana Private Limited vs Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-III | Technical Service Fees for Employee Training Held Revenue Expenditure and Fully Allowable Under Section 37 of the Income Tax Act
Facts
of the CaseThe assessee, Denso Haryana Private
Limited, a wholly owned subsidiary of Denso Corporation, Japan, was engaged in
the business of manufacturing and trading gasoline engine management systems in...
DELHI HIGH COURT HOLDS THAT RECTIFICATION UNDER SECTION 254 CANNOT BE USED TO RE-ARGUE THE MERITS OF A CASE WHEN THE ORIGINAL ITAT ORDER IS ALREADY UNDER APPEAL | Assessees vs Income Tax Department | ITA Nos. 870-879/2009 (Delhi High Court
Facts
of the Case1.
The
ITAT had earlier passed orders against the assessees.2.
The
assessees challenged those orders before the Delhi High Court by filing...
Distinguishing Capital vs. Revenue Expenditure: A Detailed Legal Analysis of the Delhi High Court’s Ruling in CIT vs. M/s Orissa Cement Ltd. and the Application of the 'Empire Jute' Test
Facts of the CaseThe Revenue filed appeals (ITA No. 314/2009 and ITA No.
545/2009) against the orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), which
had upheld the findings of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal...
Substantial Question of Law under Chapter XIV-B: Whether the Issuance and Service of Scrutiny Notice Under Section 143(2) Within the Prescribed Limitation Period is a Mandatory Jurisdictional Pre-requisite for Framing a Valid Block Assessment Order Under Section 158BC of the Income-tax Act, 1961,
Facts of the Case
The
Revenue preferred a batch of appeals, with CIT v. Pawan Gupta (ITA
No. 200/2008) taken as the lead matter, challenging the common orders
passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribun...
Commissioner of Income Tax v. M/s Control & Switchgear Contactors Ltd. | Royalty & Technical Know-How Fee – Capital vs Revenue Expenditure | Section 32, Section 143(2), Section 115JB & Section 260A of the Income-tax Act | Delhi High Court
Facts of the Case
The assessee company was engaged in the manufacture of electrical
products, control panels, switchgear, air circuit breakers and related
products.
For Assessment Year 2003-04, the assess...
Mandatory Requirement of Notice under Section 143(2) for Block Assessments: Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Pawan Gupta & Ors.
Facts of the CaseThis batch of appeals involves several assessees who were
subject to block assessment proceedings under Chapter XIV-B of the Income-tax
Act, 1961, following search and seizure operations conducted unde...
Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Anand Saxena (with connected appeals including Pawan Gupta, Tulika Mishra, and Atul Glass Industries Ltd.) – Mandatorily Non-Negotiable Requirement of Issuing and Serving a Valid Notice Under Section 143(2) Within the Prescribed Limitation Period for Framing a Valid Search-Based Block Assessment Order Under Chapter XIV-B of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
Facts of the Case
Search
Operations & Proceedings: The case involves a batch
of appeals (with CIT v. Pawan Gupta as the lead matter alongside CIT
v. Anand Saxena and others) arising from search an...