Income Tax Judgements

Held by the Hon`ble Court that, order passed by commissioner u/s 263 without granting opportunity of personal hearing to assessee is violation of natural justice. Therefore revision order passed by the commissioner is not justified in law.

Held by the Hon`ble Court that, loose papers themselves not indicating receipt of undisclosed income and in the absence of opportunity of cross examination, additions on the basis of entries on loose papers found during search not justified in law.

Held by the Hon`ble Court that, unless the A.O. had rejected the entire books of accounts to be totally unreliable and finding extreme perversity in declaration of debts to be bad debts the stand of assessee cannot be ignored by the revenue. Therefor

Held by the Hon`ble Court that, what the court is required to check is whether material exists on record for the A.O. to form the "reason to believe" and mere change in opinion on an interpretation of a provision by itself without anything more can n

Held by the Hon`ble Bench that whenever the law provides any concession for its rigors, the observance and satisfaction of the qualifying criteria are presumed and section 44AD would not operate to curtail the scope of section 2(24) read with section

Held by the hon`ble bench that as the carry forward of loss is permitted only when the return is filed within due date of filing of return, the mistake is apparent from the records, thus the A.O. can rectify the same by passing a order under section

Held by the hon`ble bench that section 54F does not mention any sub-section of section 139, thus it cannot be interpreted as section 139(1). The amount of consideration from the sale of shares utilised before the date of filing of return u/s 139(4) i

Held that in order to allow interest paid on borrowings in case of partnership firms, the assessee first to establish that it is allowable u/s 36(1)(iii) and then it does not exceed amount in excess of the limit laid down in sec. 40(b)(iv). Also held

Held by the Hon`ble Court that, whenever there is concurrent finding by the below authorities no interference should be called for by the high court.

Held by the Hon`ble Bench that the income obtained was not merely because of the bare letting of the premises but also because of the facilities and services rendered and just as utilisation of accommodation for providing board and lodging facility t