I.  Useful Case laws:

1.   The Board of Control for Cricket in India Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Cir. 35, Writ Petition no. 373/2012, Date of Decision: 02/04/2012, High Court of Bombay

Notice u/s 148 issued to assessee after four years on the grounds that assessee has not truly and fairly disclosed material facts during assessment proceedings u/s 143(3).

Held:

The assessee, during the course of assessment proceedings for Assessment Year 2004-2005, had not furnished any intimation to the Assessing Officer about the alleged misappropriation of funds. Though the FIR was lodged by the Assessee on 16 March, 2006 and the assessment proceedings for Assessment Year 2004-2005 were completed thereafter on 22 December, 2006, the filing of the FIR was not disclosed to the Assessing Officer. In the light of the alleged misappropriation of funds, the Assessee's claim to exemption under Section 11, for continuation of its registration under Sections 12A/12AA and the provisions of Section 13 need to be examined and the claim of the assessee may have to be disallowed; The fact that the lodging of the FIR was not disclosed before the Assessing Officer is not disputed by counsel. Consequently the jurisdictional requirement in the proviso to section 147 has been duly fulfilled.

(Please Click Here for judgment)

2.  Shri Piyush C. Mehta Vs. The ACIT, ITA NO. 1321/MUM/2009(A.Y. 2005-06), Date of pronouncement: 11/04/2012, ITAT- Mumbai

Issue:

Whether the disallowance of expenditure made by AO on the ground that the assessee had made TDS payments u/s 194C after the end of the year, but before the due date of filing the ROI is valid?

Held: 

That Amendment to the provisions of Sec.40 (a)(ia) of the Act, by the Finance Act, 2010 is retrospective from 1.4.2005. Consequently, any payment of tax deducted at source during previous years relevant to and from AY 05-06 can be made to the Government on or before the due date for filing return of income u/s.139(1) of the Act. If payments are made as aforesaid, then no deduction u/s.40 (a)(ia) of the Act can be made. Admittedly in the present case the Assessee had deposited the tax deducted at source on or before the due date for filing return of income u/s.139(1) of the Act and therefore the impugned disallowance deserves to be deleted. We order accordingly and allow the appeal by the Assessee.

(Please Click Here for Judgment)

Key of Success :

"Every successful person has a painful story,
every painful story has a successful ending
accept the pain and get ready to success"

Thanks for your valuable time

"Voice of CA"