Writ Petition against reassessment notice issued under new provisions cannot be simply dismissed by HC on grounds of alternate remedy.
Red chilli International Sales v. Income-tax Officer – [2023] 146 taxmann.com 224 (SC).
Revenue cannot retain TDS; credit is to be given either to deductee or person in whose hand income is assessable.
Hampi Expressways (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT – [2023] 146 taxmann.com 24 (Mumbai – Trib.).
Section 37(1) – Advertisement and marketing expenditure – SLP dismissed against order of HC that where AO in original assessment was aware of issue of expenses incurred on advertisement and marketing by assessee and assessee had filed all requisite details as called for by AO, he could not reopen assessment based on very same material to take another view that said expenditure were not deductible in view of Explanation 1 of section 37(1).
Income-tax Officer v. Rich Feel Health & Beauty (P.) Ltd. – [2022] 145 taxmann.com 644 (SC).
Calcutta High Court upholds transfer of case u/s 127 of ex-CM of M.P. ‘Kamal Nath’ from Calcutta to Delhi.
Kamal Nath v. PCIT – [2023] 146 taxmann.com 182 (Calcutta).
CBDT removes limit of Rs. 5,000/- for submission of SFT in relation to interest income.
Notification No. 1 of 2023, dated 5-1-2023.
CIT can look into report of ‘Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-corruption’ to invoke section 263.
CIT v. N. Sasikala – [2023] 146 taxmann.com 149 (Madras).