Tax
Gujarat High Court Sets Aside Transfer Of Income Tax Case From Ahmedabad To Rajkot Without Hearing Taxpayer
The Gujarat High Court has set aside an order transferring an assessee's income-tax reassessment case from Ahmedabad to Rajkot after finding that the transfer was made without granting the taxpayer an opportunity of hearing as required under the Income Tax Act. The division bench of Justice A. S. Supehia and Justice Pranav Trivedi held that in the present case the transfer of jurisdiction under Section 127(2) of the Income Tax Act could not be sustained since it had been effected without...
Goodwill Arising From Amalgamation Eligible For Depreciation In Subsequent Years: ITAT Ahmedabad
The Ahmedabad Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) held that depreciation on goodwill arising from an amalgamation can be continued in subsequent years, as long as it pertains to the same intangible asset already recognized in the foundational year. A Bench comprising Judicial Member Sanjay Garg and Accountant Member Narendra Prasad Sinha upheld the deletion of disallowance of depreciation claimed by Unicorn Packers Pvt. Ltd. (now part of the taxpayer LLP) on goodwill arising from...
ITAT Ahmedabad Grants Digvijay Lions Foundation Final Chance For 12A Renewal With ₹10,000 Cost
The Ahmedabad Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) on 25 February granted Digvijay Lions Foundation a final opportunity to furnish documents for renewal of its charitable registration under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act. The Bench, comprising Judicial Member Suchitra Kamble and Accountant Member Narendra Prasad Sinha, was hearing the foundation's appeal against rejection of its renewal application by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad. As penalty for...
Vehicle Possession And Document Transfer Concludes A Sale For Capital Gains Tax: Madras High Court
The Madras High Court has held that delivery of a vehicle along with its original documents may constitute a completed sale for income-tax purposes, even if the registration certificate is not formally transferred in the buyer's name. A Bench comprising Justice C. Saravanan dismissed the writ petition filed by Dr. Arvind Kumar R. Shaw (the petitioner), upholding the assessment order passed by the Income Tax Department treating the sale of his Rolls‑Royce as a short-term capital gains...
Reassessment Notice Not Time-Barred In Case Where Delay Caused By Taxpayer's Adjournment Requests: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has held that a reassessment notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act cannot be treated as time-barred when the delay occurred due to adjournments sought by the taxpayer during proceedings under Section 148A.A Division Bench of Justices Dinesh Mehta and Vinod Kumar dismissed writ petitions filed by two private companies challenging notices issued for Assessment Year (AY) 2017–18 on the ground that they were issued after the limitation period had expired.The...
Partial Use Of Director's Farmhouse For Business Does Not Bar Depreciation Claim: ITAT Delhi
The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) on 11 March 2026 upheld the deletion of disallowances relating to repair expenses and depreciation claimed on a farmhouse owned by Jagadish Chander Malhotra, Director of Malhotra Cables Pvt. Ltd, after finding that part of the premises was used for business purposes. A Bench comprising Judicial Member Challa Nagendra Prasad and Accountant Member M. Balaganesh affirmed the findings of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)],...
Penalty Order Is In Limitation If Issued Within Six Months Of Appellate Order: Madras High Court
The Madras High Court on 6 February held that when penalty proceedings arise from assessment orders and the assessment is challenged on appeal, the limitation period for issuing a penalty can be computed from the appellate order. A penalty issued within the prescribed period after the appellate decision is therefore not time-barred. Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy upheld a penalty imposed on actor Joseph Vijay under the Income Tax Act, 1961, observing that the penalty order dated 30 June 2022...
Input Tax Credit Transfer On Company Amalgamation Not Restricted By State: Gujarat High Court
The Gujarat High Court on 5 March held that input tax credit (ITC) cannot be denied on the amalgamation of companies merely because the transferor and transferee entities are registered in different States. A Division Bench comprising Justice A. S. Supehia and Justice Pranav Trivedi heard a petition filed by Emerson Process Management (India) Pvt. Ltd. challenging the refusal of GST authorities to allow the transfer of ITC following the amalgamation of Pentair Valves and Controls India Pvt....
No Penalty For Erroneous Claim Based On Bona Fide Interpretation Of Tax Treaty: Madras High Court
The Madras High Court on 5 February held that an erroneous claim of double taxation relief by itself cannot lead to a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 when the taxpayer has fully disclosed the relevant income and the claim arises from a bona fide interpretation of law. A Division Bench of Dr. Justice Anita Sumanth and Justice Mummineini Sudheer Kumar heard appeals filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax against Indian Overseas Bank challenging an order of the Income...
J&K&L High Court Upholds Income Tax Addition After Taxpayer Gave Inflated Stock Statement To Bank
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court on Wednesday upheld an addition to taxable income made on the basis of a stock statement furnished by a taxpayer to a bank while availing a cash credit facility, holding that the tax authorities were justified in relying on the declaration where discrepancies with the books of account remained unexplained. A Division Bench of Chief Justice Arun Palli and Justice Rajnesh Oswal dismissed an appeal filed by Ajay Food Products challenging an...
AO Cannot Reopen Assessment On Same Material To Cure Lapse In Original Proceedings: Gujarat High Court
The Gujarat High Court on 24 February ruled that the Revenue cannot initiate reassessment proceedings under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act based on the same material that was already scrutinised in the original proceedings, which later lapsed due to the Assessing Officer's failure to meet the statutory deadlines. The Division Bench of Justice A.S. Supehia and Justice Pranav Trivedi held that reopening an assessment in such circumstances is an impermissible attempt to “camouflage”...
Samsung India Anti-Profiteering Case: GSTAT Directs DGAP To Re-Examine Cost, CSD Supply Issues
The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) at New Delhi has directed the Director General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) to re-examine certain issues in the anti-profiteering proceedings involving Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd. after the matter had earlier been reserved for pronouncement of the final order. A bench comprising President Justice (Retd.) Dr. Sanjaya Kumar Mishra and Technical Member A. Venu Prasad passed the order after considering the matter and holding a conference...











