Section 264 of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 264 is Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. v. CIT (171 ITR 634), cited in 99 of the 147 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 264

Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. v. CIT
171 ITR 634 · 1988 · High Court
99
citing judgments

The Assessing Officer's power to direct a special audit under Section 142(2A) requires an objective assessment of account complexity, not subjective satisfaction. Accounts are 'complex' only if they are genuinely difficult to understand, and the AO must first make a genuine attempt to comprehend them before ordering a special audit.

CIT v. Tin Box Company
260 ITR 637 · 2003 · High Court
80
citing judgments

When an assessee possesses sufficient interest-free funds, it is presumed that any interest-free advances or investments made are from these funds, preventing disallowance of interest under Section 36(1)(iii). This principle applies if own capital and interest-free loans exceed the interest-free advances given.

Kirtilal Kalidas & Co. v. DCIT
67 ITD 573 · 1998 · ITAT
48
citing judgments

An assessment order is invalid if it relies on adverse material collected by the Assessing Officer without providing the assessee an opportunity to confront and rebut it, as this constitutes a serious violation of the principles of natural justice, specifically *audi alteram partem*.

Peerless General Finance & Investment Co. Ltd. v. DCIT
236 ITR 671 · 1999 · High Court
45
citing judgments

A higher authority's approval for an income tax proposal must reflect an application of mind to the facts and cannot be deemed from a mere nomination. An assessment made without providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee violates principles of natural justice and is therefore invalid.

Kamal Kumar Kalia v. Union of India
268 Taxmann 398 · 2020 · High Court
26
citing judgments

Employees of Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs) and nationalized banks are not considered government employees for the purpose of exemption under section 10(10AA) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and are not discriminated against when compared to Central and State Government employees.

CIT v. Universal Medicare (P.) Ltd.
190 Taxmann 144 · 2010 · High Court
25
citing judgments

Deemed dividend under Section 2(22)(e) is taxable in the hands of the shareholders, not the company. The Assessing Officer's reliance on the Bhaumik Colour decision is noted.

Techbooks International (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-3, Noida
63 Taxmann.com 114 · 2015 · High Court
22
citing judgments

The determination of Arm's Length Price (ALP) for international transactions involving debt requires consideration of both the amount on which interest should be charged and the arm's length rate for that interest. Guidelines are provided for computing the ALP of the international transaction of 'debt arising during the course of business.'

CIT v. Ignifluid Boilers (I) Ltd.
283 ITR 295 · 2006 · High Court
19
citing judgments
PCIT v. Anuj Bansal
2023 SCC OnLine DEL 4159 · 2023 · Reported
13
citing judgments
ACIT v. Bhaumik Colour (P) Ltd.
120 TTJ 865 · 2009 · ITAT
12
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 264

Showing 120 of 147 · Page 1 of 8

...