Congratulations!

[Valid RSS] This is a valid RSS feed.

Recommendations

This feed is valid, but interoperability with the widest range of feed readers could be improved by implementing the following recommendations.

Source: https://itatonline.org/digest/feed/

  1. <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
  2. xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
  3. xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
  4. xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
  5. xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
  6. xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
  7. xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
  8. >
  9.  
  10. <channel>
  11. <title>Digest of case laws</title>
  12. <atom:link href="https://itatonline.org/digest/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
  13. <link>https://itatonline.org/digest</link>
  14. <description>Online digest of latest case laws</description>
  15. <lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 May 2025 10:43:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
  16. <language>en-US</language>
  17. <sy:updatePeriod>
  18. hourly </sy:updatePeriod>
  19. <sy:updateFrequency>
  20. 1 </sy:updateFrequency>
  21. <generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.8.1</generator>
  22. <site xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">145867742</site> <item>
  23. <title>Mohd. Wajahat Ali Khan v.ITO (IT) (2024) 231 TTJ 1082 / 242 DTR 51 / 38 NYPTTJ 648 (Hyd)(Trib)</title>
  24. <link>https://itatonline.org/digest/mohd-wajahat-ali-khan-v-ito-it-2024-231-ttj-1082-242-dtr-51-38-nypttj-648-hydtrib/</link>
  25. <comments>https://itatonline.org/digest/mohd-wajahat-ali-khan-v-ito-it-2024-231-ttj-1082-242-dtr-51-38-nypttj-648-hydtrib/#respond</comments>
  27. <dc:creator><![CDATA[ksalegal]]></dc:creator>
  28. <pubDate>Thu, 08 May 2025 10:43:57 +0000</pubDate>
  29. <category><![CDATA[Income-Tax Act]]></category>
  30. <guid isPermaLink="false">https://itatonline.org/digest/mohd-wajahat-ali-khan-v-ito-it-2024-231-ttj-1082-242-dtr-51-38-nypttj-648-hydtrib/</guid>
  31.  
  32. <description><![CDATA[S. 271F : Penalty-Return of income-Failure to furnish-Non-Resident-Pendency of appeal before Tribunal-Order passed by the CIT(A) confirming the levy of penalty is set aside and the issue is restored back to the AO-AO is directed to take up the issue of penalty after the disposal of the appeal filed by the assessee before the Tribunal and decide the issue in accordance with the law. [S.69A, 271(1)(b)] ]]></description>
  33. <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong> </strong></p>
  34. <p>Held that the assessee, a non-resident, having earned income outside India, was not required to file return of income in India; unless the Tribunal decides the issue of addition made by the AO, it cannot be said that the assessee is having taxable income in India and that he was required to file his return, and, therefore, AO erred in levying penalty under s. 271F.  Issue is restored back to the AO for deciding the same after disposal of the appeal filed by the assessee before the Tribunal.  As regards penalty u/s 271(1)(b) also the issue is restored back to the AO for deciding after disposal of the appeal filed by the assessee before the Tribunal (AY.2016-17,  2017-18)</p>
  35. ]]></content:encoded>
  37. <wfw:commentRss>https://itatonline.org/digest/mohd-wajahat-ali-khan-v-ito-it-2024-231-ttj-1082-242-dtr-51-38-nypttj-648-hydtrib/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
  38. <slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
  41. <post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">53918</post-id> </item>
  42. <item>
  43. <title>Yamuna Power &#038; Infrastructure Ltd. v. Dy.CIT : (2024) 231 TTJ 1059 / 243 DTR 33 / 38 NYPTTJ 956 (Chd)(Trib)</title>
  44. <link>https://itatonline.org/digest/yamuna-power-infrastructure-ltd-v-dy-cit-2024-231-ttj-1059-243-dtr-33-38-nypttj-956-chdtrib/</link>
  45. <comments>https://itatonline.org/digest/yamuna-power-infrastructure-ltd-v-dy-cit-2024-231-ttj-1059-243-dtr-33-38-nypttj-956-chdtrib/#respond</comments>
  47. <dc:creator><![CDATA[ksalegal]]></dc:creator>
  48. <pubDate>Thu, 08 May 2025 10:43:44 +0000</pubDate>
  49. <category><![CDATA[Income-Tax Act]]></category>
  50. <guid isPermaLink="false">https://itatonline.org/digest/yamuna-power-infrastructure-ltd-v-dy-cit-2024-231-ttj-1059-243-dtr-33-38-nypttj-956-chdtrib/</guid>
  51.  
  52. <description><![CDATA[S. 271AA : Penalty-Failure to keep and maintain books of accounts-Documents-International transaction-Transfer pricing-Initiated on different grounds-Levied on different grounds-Had a reasonable basis for non-reporting such transactions-Levy of penalty is deleted.[S.92D, 273B] ]]></description>
  53. <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Held that once the proceedings are initiated on one or more grounds, the penalty should also be imposed on the same grounds. It is a settled legal proposition that where the basis of the initiation of penalty proceedings are not identical with the ground on which the penalty is finally imposed, the imposition of penalty cannot be sustained and deserves to be set aside. (AY.2014-15)</p>
  54. ]]></content:encoded>
  56. <wfw:commentRss>https://itatonline.org/digest/yamuna-power-infrastructure-ltd-v-dy-cit-2024-231-ttj-1059-243-dtr-33-38-nypttj-956-chdtrib/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
  57. <slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
  60. <post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">53916</post-id> </item>
  61. <item>
  62. <title>Sree Navaladiyan Finance v.Dy.CIT (2024) 231 TTJ 192 (Chennai)(Trib)</title>
  63. <link>https://itatonline.org/digest/sree-navaladiyan-finance-v-dy-cit-2024-231-ttj-192-chennaitrib/</link>
  64. <comments>https://itatonline.org/digest/sree-navaladiyan-finance-v-dy-cit-2024-231-ttj-192-chennaitrib/#respond</comments>
  66. <dc:creator><![CDATA[ksalegal]]></dc:creator>
  67. <pubDate>Thu, 08 May 2025 10:43:29 +0000</pubDate>
  68. <category><![CDATA[Income-Tax Act]]></category>
  69. <guid isPermaLink="false">https://itatonline.org/digest/sree-navaladiyan-finance-v-dy-cit-2024-231-ttj-192-chennaitrib/</guid>
  70.  
  71. <description><![CDATA[S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Not specifying the charge-Penalty is deleted. [S.270A,  274]]]></description>
  72. <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Held that  the charge framed by the AO is that there  is under reporting of income however the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) without mentioning whether it is a case of concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. Penalty is deleted. (AY. 2013-14 to 2016-17)</p>
  73. ]]></content:encoded>
  75. <wfw:commentRss>https://itatonline.org/digest/sree-navaladiyan-finance-v-dy-cit-2024-231-ttj-192-chennaitrib/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
  76. <slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
  79. <post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">53914</post-id> </item>
  80. <item>
  81. <title>Kaushik Pra Vinchandra Gohel v. AO (2004) 231 TTJ 1 (UO) (Ahd)(Trib)</title>
  82. <link>https://itatonline.org/digest/kaushik-pra-vinchandra-gohel-v-ao-2004-231-ttj-1-uo-ahdtrib-3/</link>
  83. <comments>https://itatonline.org/digest/kaushik-pra-vinchandra-gohel-v-ao-2004-231-ttj-1-uo-ahdtrib-3/#respond</comments>
  85. <dc:creator><![CDATA[ksalegal]]></dc:creator>
  86. <pubDate>Thu, 08 May 2025 10:43:14 +0000</pubDate>
  87. <category><![CDATA[Income-Tax Act]]></category>
  88. <guid isPermaLink="false">https://itatonline.org/digest/kaushik-pra-vinchandra-gohel-v-ao-2004-231-ttj-1-uo-ahdtrib-3/</guid>
  89.  
  90. <description><![CDATA[S. 271(1)(b) : Penalty-Failure to comply with notices-Non appearance was not with any malafide intention-Penalty is deleted. [S. 142(1), 271B] ]]></description>
  91. <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Held that the assessee, an illiterate person, having not put up appearance in response to the notices under s. 142(1) issued by the AO acting on the advice of a tax professional, there was a reasonable cause for not making due compliance of the notices and, therefore, it is not a fit case for levy of penalty under s. 271(1)(b). (AY. 2015-16 to 2017-18)</p>
  92. ]]></content:encoded>
  94. <wfw:commentRss>https://itatonline.org/digest/kaushik-pra-vinchandra-gohel-v-ao-2004-231-ttj-1-uo-ahdtrib-3/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
  95. <slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
  98. <post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">53912</post-id> </item>
  99. <item>
  100. <title>Exotic Realtors &#038; Developers v. PCIT (2024) 231 TTJ 132 / 241 DTR 33 /38 NYPTTJ 993 (Chd) (Trib)</title>
  101. <link>https://itatonline.org/digest/exotic-realtors-developers-v-pcit-2024-231-ttj-132-241-dtr-33-38-nypttj-993-chd-trib/</link>
  102. <comments>https://itatonline.org/digest/exotic-realtors-developers-v-pcit-2024-231-ttj-132-241-dtr-33-38-nypttj-993-chd-trib/#respond</comments>
  104. <dc:creator><![CDATA[ksalegal]]></dc:creator>
  105. <pubDate>Thu, 08 May 2025 10:42:55 +0000</pubDate>
  106. <category><![CDATA[Income-Tax Act]]></category>
  107. <guid isPermaLink="false">https://itatonline.org/digest/exotic-realtors-developers-v-pcit-2024-231-ttj-132-241-dtr-33-38-nypttj-993-chd-trib/</guid>
  108.  
  109. <description><![CDATA[S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Assessing Officer has applied his mind-The Principal CIT to hold bare minimum inquiry before passing the order which in the instant case has not happened. Revision order is quashed.  [S. 143(3),144, 144B, 147,  263(1)(b)] ]]></description>
  110. <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tribunal held that the AO has made enquiries on all the matters from notices issued under s. 142(1) and the assessee has filed submission on the questions in the notices issued by AO from time to time. AO has applied his mind irrespective of the fact that issues were not discussed in the assessment order.  The Principal CIT to hold bare minimum inquiry before passing the order which in the instant case has not happened. Revision order is quashed.  (AY. 2018-19)</p>
  111. ]]></content:encoded>
  113. <wfw:commentRss>https://itatonline.org/digest/exotic-realtors-developers-v-pcit-2024-231-ttj-132-241-dtr-33-38-nypttj-993-chd-trib/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
  114. <slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
  117. <post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">53910</post-id> </item>
  118. <item>
  119. <title>Raj Kumar Dua v. ITO (2024) 231 TTJ 22 (UO) (Amristsar) (Trib)</title>
  120. <link>https://itatonline.org/digest/raj-kumar-dua-v-ito-2024-231-ttj-22-uo-amristsar-trib/</link>
  121. <comments>https://itatonline.org/digest/raj-kumar-dua-v-ito-2024-231-ttj-22-uo-amristsar-trib/#respond</comments>
  123. <dc:creator><![CDATA[ksalegal]]></dc:creator>
  124. <pubDate>Thu, 08 May 2025 10:42:39 +0000</pubDate>
  125. <category><![CDATA[Income-Tax Act]]></category>
  126. <guid isPermaLink="false">https://itatonline.org/digest/raj-kumar-dua-v-ito-2024-231-ttj-22-uo-amristsar-trib/</guid>
  127.  
  128. <description><![CDATA[S. 251 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Powers-Natural justice-Not dealing on merits-Matter remanded to the CIT(A) to decide on merits. [S. 250,251(1)(a)]  ]]></description>
  129. <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Order of  CIT(A)  dismissing the appeal without deciding the issue on merits is set aside to decide the issue on merits. (AY. 2017-18)</p>
  130. ]]></content:encoded>
  132. <wfw:commentRss>https://itatonline.org/digest/raj-kumar-dua-v-ito-2024-231-ttj-22-uo-amristsar-trib/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
  133. <slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
  136. <post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">53908</post-id> </item>
  137. <item>
  138. <title>Shree Estates v. ITO (2024) 231 TTJ 628 / 208 ITD 287 / 38 NYPTTJ 1032 (Hyd) (Trib)</title>
  139. <link>https://itatonline.org/digest/shree-estates-v-ito-2024-231-ttj-628-208-itd-287-38-nypttj-1032-hyd-trib/</link>
  140. <comments>https://itatonline.org/digest/shree-estates-v-ito-2024-231-ttj-628-208-itd-287-38-nypttj-1032-hyd-trib/#respond</comments>
  142. <dc:creator><![CDATA[ksalegal]]></dc:creator>
  143. <pubDate>Thu, 08 May 2025 10:42:21 +0000</pubDate>
  144. <category><![CDATA[Income-Tax Act]]></category>
  145. <guid isPermaLink="false">https://itatonline.org/digest/shree-estates-v-ito-2024-231-ttj-628-208-itd-287-38-nypttj-1032-hyd-trib/</guid>
  146.  
  147. <description><![CDATA[S. 251 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Powers-co-terminus powers with that of the AO-Revaluation of asset-Assessing the income under different head-Cash credits-Capital gains-Powers exercised by the CIT(A) cannot be said to be beyond the scope of provisions of s. 251(1)-What was considered by the CIT(A) is the very same income which arose out of the revaluation of the asset held by the firm. [S. 45(4), 68] ]]></description>
  148. <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tribunal held that  once the first appellate authority is having the co-terminus powers with that of the AO, then the powers of the CIT(A) under s. 251(1)(a) are wide enough to consider any other issue which comes to his knowledge during the course of appellate proceedings, but such issues should be emanating either from the assessment order or from the return of income filed by the assessee. In the present case, the AO considered the increase in the capital accounts of partners on account of revaluation of the assets held by the assessee-firm under s. 68 as unexplained cash credit. The CIT(A) having noticed the fact invoked the provisions of s. 45(4). Therefore, the powers exercised by the CIT(A) cannot be said to be beyond the scope of provisions of s. 251(1). What was considered by the CIT(A) is the very same income which arose out of the revaluation of the asset held by the firm and the same has been assessed under proper provisions of section and as per facts available on record. Followed CIT v. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry (1962) 44 ITR 891 (SC). (AY. 2018-19)</p>
  149. ]]></content:encoded>
  151. <wfw:commentRss>https://itatonline.org/digest/shree-estates-v-ito-2024-231-ttj-628-208-itd-287-38-nypttj-1032-hyd-trib/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
  152. <slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
  155. <post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">53906</post-id> </item>
  156. <item>
  157. <title>GRR Holdings v. Dy.CIT (2024) 231 TTJ 249 / 38 NYPTTJ 991 (Hyd) (Trib)</title>
  158. <link>https://itatonline.org/digest/grr-holdings-v-dy-cit-2024-231-ttj-249-38-nypttj-991-hyd-trib/</link>
  159. <comments>https://itatonline.org/digest/grr-holdings-v-dy-cit-2024-231-ttj-249-38-nypttj-991-hyd-trib/#respond</comments>
  161. <dc:creator><![CDATA[ksalegal]]></dc:creator>
  162. <pubDate>Thu, 08 May 2025 10:41:26 +0000</pubDate>
  163. <category><![CDATA[Income-Tax Act]]></category>
  164. <guid isPermaLink="false">https://itatonline.org/digest/grr-holdings-v-dy-cit-2024-231-ttj-249-38-nypttj-991-hyd-trib/</guid>
  165.  
  166. <description><![CDATA[S. 251 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Powers-Revision-Revision order is set aside by the Tribunal-Issue subject matter of consideration or examination by a higher authority in the rank of hierarchy, the lower authority in the rank or the authority exercising equal powers cannot sit in judgment over the order passed by the higher authorities-The powers exercised by the CIT(A) under s. 251(1) to enhance the assessment towards consideration paid for purchase of property in the hands of the assessee is beyond the scope of the powers of the CIT(A)-Investment in purchase of property-Capital contribution by partners-Addition is deleted. [S.69, 153A, 251(1),  263] ]]></description>
  167. <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tribunal held that Principal CIT revised the assessment order passed by the AO under s. 144 r/w s. 153A by exercising powers conferred under s. 263 and set aside the assessment order passed by the AO with a direction to reconsider the issue of additions made towards the consideration paid for purchase of property under s. 69. On appeal by the assessee, the Tribunal set aside the order passed by the Principal CIT. Therefore, the powers exercised by the CIT(A) under s. 251(1) to enhance the assessment towards consideration paid for purchase of property in the hands of the assessee is beyond the scope of the powers of the CIT(A). Tribunal also held that investment in purchase of property from the capital contribution by partners.  Addition is deleted.  (AY. 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18)</p>
  168. ]]></content:encoded>
  170. <wfw:commentRss>https://itatonline.org/digest/grr-holdings-v-dy-cit-2024-231-ttj-249-38-nypttj-991-hyd-trib/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
  171. <slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
  174. <post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">53904</post-id> </item>
  175. <item>
  176. <title>S.K. Sharma Contractor v. ITO (2024) 231 TTJ 354/ 239 DTR 161 / 38 NYPTTJ 689 (Delhi)(Trib)</title>
  177. <link>https://itatonline.org/digest/s-k-sharma-contractor-v-ito-2024-231-ttj-354-239-dtr-161-38-nypttj-689-delhitrib/</link>
  178. <comments>https://itatonline.org/digest/s-k-sharma-contractor-v-ito-2024-231-ttj-354-239-dtr-161-38-nypttj-689-delhitrib/#respond</comments>
  180. <dc:creator><![CDATA[ksalegal]]></dc:creator>
  181. <pubDate>Thu, 08 May 2025 10:41:08 +0000</pubDate>
  182. <category><![CDATA[Income-Tax Act]]></category>
  183. <guid isPermaLink="false">https://itatonline.org/digest/s-k-sharma-contractor-v-ito-2024-231-ttj-354-239-dtr-161-38-nypttj-689-delhitrib/</guid>
  184.  
  185. <description><![CDATA[S. 246A : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Appealable orders-Appeal-Non-disposal of rectification application  within period of six months-Quantum od refund-AO is directed to entertain the said application under s. 154 and dispose it of as per law after verification of records. [S. 154(8),244A]  ]]></description>
  186. <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As per the direction of the  CIT(A)&#8217;s order dt. 4th Jan., 2013, the assessee filed an application under S.  154 before the AO for proper working of quantum of refund due to it along with interest thereon under S 244A which was not disposed of within the statutory time period of six months as per s. 154(8).  The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) which was dismissed. On appeal the Tribunal held that since no order was ever passed by the AO, the assessee was not aware about the fate of its application filed under s. 154. Said application under s. 154 and grievance petitions were disposed of together by a communication dt. 4th July, 2020. Since the AO failed to discharge his statutory duty in passing the order disposing the application filed under s. 154, the assessee was justified in raising this issue before the appellate authority as this was the only recourse available to it. In view of Circular No. 73, dt. 7th Jan., 1972, a rectification application can be disposed of by the AO even after the expiry of the statutory time-limit on merits and in accordance with law. Inference drawn by the assessee that the communication dt. 4th July, 2020 is nothing but refusal to admit his claim under s. 154 is not misplaced. AO is directed to entertain the said application under s. 154 and dispose it of as per law after verification of record.  Circular 73 dt. 7 th Jan, 1972,Circular No.  4. dt. 20 th June, 2012.  (AY. 1991-92)</p>
  187. ]]></content:encoded>
  189. <wfw:commentRss>https://itatonline.org/digest/s-k-sharma-contractor-v-ito-2024-231-ttj-354-239-dtr-161-38-nypttj-689-delhitrib/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
  190. <slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
  193. <post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">53902</post-id> </item>
  194. <item>
  195. <title>Avia Xpert (P) Ltd. v ITO (2024) 231 TTJ 310 / 241 DTR 161 / 38 NYPTTJ 1031 (Delhi)(Trib)</title>
  196. <link>https://itatonline.org/digest/avia-xpert-p-ltd-v-ito-2024-231-ttj-310-241-dtr-161-38-nypttj-1031-delhitrib/</link>
  197. <comments>https://itatonline.org/digest/avia-xpert-p-ltd-v-ito-2024-231-ttj-310-241-dtr-161-38-nypttj-1031-delhitrib/#respond</comments>
  199. <dc:creator><![CDATA[ksalegal]]></dc:creator>
  200. <pubDate>Thu, 08 May 2025 10:40:54 +0000</pubDate>
  201. <category><![CDATA[Income-Tax Act]]></category>
  202. <guid isPermaLink="false">https://itatonline.org/digest/avia-xpert-p-ltd-v-ito-2024-231-ttj-310-241-dtr-161-38-nypttj-1031-delhitrib/</guid>
  203.  
  204. <description><![CDATA[S. 154 : Rectification of mistake-Mistake apparent from the record-Order passed by the CPC   without issuing any prior notice/intimation-Disallowance of PF /ESI-Jurisdictional High Court in favour of assessee-Adjustment is bad in law. [S.36(1)(va)]]]></description>
  205. <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Held that the order under S. 154 passed by the CPC without issuing any prior notice granting an opportunity of being heard to the assessee is bad in law.  The issue of allowability of PF/ESI contributions already stood decided in favour of the assessee by a decision of the jurisdictional High Court as on the date of passing of rectification order. (AY. 2017-18)</p>
  206. ]]></content:encoded>
  208. <wfw:commentRss>https://itatonline.org/digest/avia-xpert-p-ltd-v-ito-2024-231-ttj-310-241-dtr-161-38-nypttj-1031-delhitrib/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
  209. <slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
  212. <post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">53900</post-id> </item>
  213. </channel>
  214. </rss>
  215.  

If you would like to create a banner that links to this page (i.e. this validation result), do the following:

  1. Download the "valid RSS" banner.

  2. Upload the image to your own server. (This step is important. Please do not link directly to the image on this server.)

  3. Add this HTML to your page (change the image src attribute if necessary):

If you would like to create a text link instead, here is the URL you can use:

http://www.feedvalidator.org/check.cgi?url=https%3A//itatonline.org/digest/feed/

Home · About · News · Docs · Terms

 
Copyright © 2002-9 Sam Ruby, Mark Pilgrim, Joseph Walton, and Phil Ringnalda