Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>High Court upholds re-assessment order; emphasizes statutory compliance & accurate info in tax proceedings. Stay on recovery granted.</h1> <h3>M/s. Elektronik Lab, Known as Elektronik Lab India Private Limited, Versus The Income Tax Officer, Corporate Ward -2 (1)</h3> M/s. Elektronik Lab, Known as Elektronik Lab India Private Limited, Versus The Income Tax Officer, Corporate Ward -2 (1) - TMI Issues:1. Challenge to re-assessment order for AY 2012-13 under the Income Tax Act, 1961.2. Misquoting of PAN number in the notice under Section 148.3. Alleged errors in computation of interest income and violation of natural justice principles.4. Failure to file a return of income in response to the notice under Section 148.5. Proper procedure for re-assessments as per the Supreme Court's guidelines.Issue 1: Challenge to re-assessment order for AY 2012-13 under the Income Tax Act, 1961The petitioner challenged the re-assessment order dated 30.12.2019 for AY 2012-13 under the Income Tax Act, 1961. The primary argument raised was regarding the notice under Section 148 misquoting the PAN number of the assessee, which was deemed to vitiate the basis of the re-assessment proceedings. Additionally, the petitioner disputed the existence of bank accounts and interest income, highlighting the lack of supporting details provided by the assessing officer. The discrepancy between the proposed addition in the show cause notice and the actual amount taxed, along with alleged non-credit for tax deducted at source, were also contested.Issue 2: Misquoting of PAN number in the notice under Section 148The counsel for the petitioner emphasized the incorrect PAN number (AABCE8131A) mentioned in the notice under Section 148, which was meant for 'M/s. Elektronik Lab India Private Limited', whereas the correct PAN for the petitioner was AADCE2492E. The petitioner's director and individual PAN holder also had separate PANs. The failure to rectify this discrepancy immediately upon receiving the notice was noted, and the explanation offered later was considered an afterthought by the court.Issue 3: Alleged errors in computation of interest income and violation of natural justice principlesThe petitioner raised concerns about errors in the computation of interest income from bank deposits and the lack of supporting documentation provided by the assessing officer. The violation of principles of natural justice was alleged due to discrepancies in the proposed addition in the show cause notice and the final amount taxed, as well as the non-credit for tax deducted at source. The court noted these arguments alongside the challenge to the re-assessment order.Issue 4: Failure to file a return of income in response to the notice under Section 148The petitioner failed to file a return of income in response to the notice under Section 148, citing a mismatch in PAN numbers as a reason. However, the court found this explanation insufficient, especially since it was not raised before the assessing officer promptly. The court highlighted the statutory requirement for the assessee to file a return of income in response to such notices, which the petitioner failed to comply with.Issue 5: Proper procedure for re-assessments as per the Supreme Court's guidelinesThe court referenced the Supreme Court's guidelines in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer, emphasizing the importance of following proper procedures in re-assessments. It reiterated the necessity for the assessee to file a return of income or state compliance with the earlier filing in response to the notice under Section 148. The court directed the petitioner to pursue statutory appeal, permitting manual filing due to technical concerns, and ordered a stay on recovery of the disputed demand until the appeal's disposal by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).In conclusion, the High Court upheld the re-assessment order for AY 2012-13 but directed the petitioner to pursue statutory appeal following proper procedures. The court emphasized the importance of compliance with statutory requirements and the necessity for providing accurate information during tax proceedings.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found