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.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
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:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    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
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      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

        -

        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>Court quashes tax notice, upholds OTS settlement, citing lack of diligence by assessing officer.</h1> <h3>Vedanta Ltd. (Successor of Sterlite Industries (India) Limited) Versus Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle- 26 (1), New Delhi</h3> The court quashed the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in favor of the petitioner. The notice challenged payments made to foreign ... Reopening of assessment - TDS u/s 195 - payments to the foreign entities without deducting tax - HELD THAT:- Both parties are ad idem that the judgment rendered by the coordinate bench of this Court titled Vedanta Ltd. (Successor of Sterlite Industries (India) Limited) [2019 (8) TMI 1067 - DELHI HIGH COURT] covers the said issue against the respondent. To be noted, the said judgment concerned Assessment Year (AY) 2010-2011, while the instant matter relates to AY 2011-2012. In these circumstances, we have queried the learned counsel for the parties, as to whether the aforementioned judgment was carried in appeal to the Supreme Court. Learned counsel for the parties say, that the judgment remains undisturbed. Write off interest and other liabilities - assessee entered into a One Time Settlement (OTS) with the Vijaya Bank, and in that process, an amount equivalent and interest accrued thereof, was written-off - HELD THAT:- As what emerges from a perusal of the Tribunal’s judgment that the claim by Vijaya Bank for recovery against the petitioner [i.e., defendant no.1] in respect of the indemnity bond furnished was dismissed. There was, therefore, no loan, as alleged, taken by petitioner and thus, quite logically, no OTS could have been arrived at between the petitioner and Vijaya Bank. AO, in our view, also went wrong in observing that the petitioner may have claimed interest against the loan supposedly received by it in earlier years. Petitioner had only furnished an indemnity bond for possible misuse of dividend warrants. Dividends, as is well known, involve appropriation of profits and therefore, the petitioner could not have possibly claimed deduction against its profits. Given these circumstances, we are of the view, that there was no application of mind on behalf of the assessing officer in issuing the impugned notice even as regards the second issue. As noticed above, as far as the first issue is concerned, it is covered in favour of the petitioner i.e., the assessee, by the judgment referred to above, passed by the coordinate Bench of this Court. We are in agreement with the petitioner’s stand, that the impugned notice issued under Section 148 of the Act, cannot be sustained. Issues:1. Challenge against notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.2. Disallowance of payments made to foreign entities and One Time Settlement (OTS) with a bank.Analysis:Issue 1:The writ petition challenges a notice dated 28.03.2018 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. An interim direction was issued on 20.12.2018, preventing the passing of a final order until the next hearing. The petitioner argued that the notice was based on two issues raised by the assessing officer. The first issue involved payments made to foreign entities without tax deduction, covered by a previous judgment. The second issue pertained to an OTS with a bank. The court noted that the first issue was already decided in a judgment related to AY 2010-2011, favoring the petitioner. The court inquired if the judgment was appealed, to which it was confirmed that the judgment remained undisturbed. Consequently, the court found that the notice could not be sustained and quashed it.Issue 2:The second issue revolved around an OTS with a bank, where an amount was written off. The court examined the order passed by the Tribunal, which showed that the claim against the petitioner for recovery was dismissed. The Tribunal's judgment clarified that there was no loan taken by the petitioner, and thus, no OTS could have occurred. The assessing officer's observation regarding interest claimed against a loan was deemed incorrect, as the petitioner had only provided an indemnity bond. The court emphasized that dividends do not involve profits appropriation, negating the possibility of claiming deductions against profits. It concluded that the assessing officer did not apply due diligence in issuing the notice concerning the second issue. Therefore, the court quashed the notice under Section 148 of the Act, in favor of the petitioner.This comprehensive analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues, arguments presented, relevant legal precedents, and the court's reasoning leading to the decision to quash the impugned notice.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found