Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 79 (0.28 seconds)
Bsbk Engineers Private Limited ... vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax ... on 26 September, 2024
cites
Section 292B in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
M/S Smc Power Generation Ltd, New Delhi vs Acit, New Delhi on 10 December, 2018
Assessment in the case of amalgamated entity was framed in 23.03.2015 for AY 2012-13 wherein the AO has categorically recorded the aspect of amalgamation. In the Financial
Statements of the amalgamated entity, it is categorically recorded that in terms of the scheme of amalgamation all the assets and liabilities of the amalgamating company got
transferred to the amalgamated entity w.e.f. 01.04.2011. Further, specific request for surrender of PAN was made vide letter dated 03.05.2018, however, the status of the same was
still appearing as active. The present case admittedly falls under Category I as notice under section 148 of the IT Act has been issued in the name of the amalgamating entity alone
and is squarely covered by the law laid down in the case of PCIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd.: [2019] 416 ITR 613 (SC) & Dalmia Power Ltd. vs. ACIT [2020] 420 ITR 339 (SC).
Section 147 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Sky Light Hospitality Llp vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 2 February, 2018
Hence,
while dismissing the special leave petition this Court observed that it
was the peculiar facts of the case which led the Court to accept the
finding that the wrong name given in the notice was merely a
technical error which could be corrected under Section 292-B. Thus,
there is no conflict between the decisions in Spice
Enfotainment [CIT v. Spice Enfotainment Ltd., (2020) 18 SCC 353]
on the one hand and Skylight Hospitality LLP [Skylight Hospitality
LLP v. CIT, (2018) 13 SCC 147] on the other hand. It is of relevance
to refer to Section 292-B of the Income Tax Act which reads as
follows:
Section 170 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Mahesh Damji Lapasia vs Income Tax Officer Ward Kalyan And Ors on 11 April, 2022
30. From a reading of the order of this Court dated 6-4-2018
[Skylight Hospitality LLP v. CIT, (2018) 13 SCC 147] in the special
leave petition filed by Skylight Hospitality LLP against the judgment
of the Delhi High Court rejecting its challenge, it is evident that the
peculiar facts of the case weighed with this Court in coming to this
conclusion that there was only a clerical mistake within the meaning
of Section 292-B. The decision in Skylight Hospitality LLP [Skylight
Hospitality LLP v. CIT, 2018 SCC OnLine Del 7155 : (2018) 405
ITR 296] has been distinguished by the Delhi, Gujarat and Madras
High Courts in: