By deciding the question of limitation of AY 2000-01 against ...

Income Tax Tribunal's Flawed Appeal Handling for AY 2000-01, 2003-04, and 2004-05 Leads to Miscarriage of Justice.

October 1, 2020

Case Laws Income Tax HC

By deciding the question of limitation of AY 2000-01 against Revenue, and by holding that there was no tax liability for AY 2003-04 and AY 2004-05, these two sets of orders passed by learned Income Tax Appellate Authority have resulted in a serious miscarriage of justice, which we cannot permit. The manner in which the various appeals and Miscellaneous Petition have been dealt with by the learned Tribunal for all the three Assessment years in question leaves much to be desired and the change of stand allowed by the Tribunal and later withdrawal of the appeals for AY 2003-04 and AY 2004-05 under the litigation policy of the CBDT Circular dated 28.01.2016, has resulted in all this goof up. - HC

View Source

← Previous Next →

By deciding the question of limitation of AY 2000-01 against ...

Income Tax Tribunal's Flawed Appeal Handling for AY 2000-01, 2003-04, and 2004-05 Leads to Miscarriage of Justice.

October 1, 2020

Case Laws Income Tax HC

You may also like:

HC ruled on belated assessment orders under Entry Tax Act 2001 for AY 2003-04 and 2004-05. Though no explicit limitation period exists, assessments must be completed...

Demand of Entry Tax - machinery imported by the assessee during the A.Y. 2000-2001, but exported outside the country in the year 2004-2005 - The event of subsequent...

Penalty u/s 271-B – failure to get accounts audited u/s 44AB - penalty proceedings for the A.Y. 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04 were initiated after the period of...

Validity of reopening of assessment u/s 147 - by the time, assessment order for the assessment year 2004-05 was passed on 31.12.2010, six year period for reopening of...

Disallowance of interest on inter-corporate deposits - The observation of Ld. AO that there was increase in borrowed funds during AY 2003-04 has no relevance since the...

Depreciation u/s 32 on non compete fee - For the assessment year 2003-04, the CIT(A) allowed it and the Assessing Officer gave effect to the order passed by the CIT(A)....

Indian resident deriving foreign income - interpretation of the expression “may be taxed” - Once the tax is payable or paid in the country of source, then country of...

Index of Eight Core Industries (Base: 2004-05=100) , August 2011.

The Appellate Tribunal dismissed the appeal u/s 249(4)(b) due to non-payment of advance tax. The assessee did not respond to the notice u/s 142(1) to clarify tax payment....

Depreciation on leased assets u/s 32 - In the instant case, the revenue has accepted the claim of the assessee for depreciation under Section 32 of the Act for the...

ITAT addressed two key issues in the appeal. On trading results, following precedent from AY 2000-01 to 2004-05, the Tribunal restricted gross profit rate to 15% and...

Validity of revised return 139(5) - Revised return did not conform to the prescription of section 139(5), before its substitution w.e.f. A.Y. 2017-18, which provided for...

CENVAT Credit - CVD paid through DEPB Scrip - It is settled that even if the licences were issued under FTP 2000-07 then also the credit cannot be denied, so long the...

Notification No. 165/2003-Cus. dated 12.11.2003 excluded reflective glass from Anti-Dumping Duty (ADD), but Notification No. 6/2009 did not. Notification No. 51/2009...

CIRP - Validity of penalty proceedings under the Income Tax Act - The Assessment Order of A.Y. 2018-19 year and notice u/s 274 rws 271 AAC(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961...

Quick Updates: