-
HC - Bombay HC Nullifies Reassessment Notices, Upholding Precedent over Contradictory AAR Ruling.
Usha Eswar Vs Income Tax Oficer
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31978 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
HC - Bombay HC Quashes Vedanta's Reassessment Notice: Disallowance of Interest Expenditure Challenged; AO's altered opinion compared to the stance taken during the initial assessment proceedings.
Vedanta Limited Vs Deputy Commisioner of Income Tax
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31946 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
Invalid Reopening of Assessment u/s 147: Failure to Provide Complete Details of Properties Purchased as Required by Notice u/s 142(1) and u/s 148A(b) - Assessee's Reply Included Details of Consideration and Source of Funds.
URBAN HOMES REALTY VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31931 (HC-BOMBAY) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=90004&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Bombay HC Quashes Reassessment Notice Against Deceased Assessee; Existence of an active PAN for the deceased Assessee does not create an exception in favor of the Revenue.
Dhirendra Bhupendra Sanghvi Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31911 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
HC - If the tax is not exigible, there is no question of tax at source being deducted - Revenue’s argument not acceptable that since its SLP against the principal entity is admitted by the SC, the issue has to be kept alive.
Hapag Lloyd India Pvt. Ltd Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31892 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
HC - USD 11,80,500 received by the Assessee from Colgate Palmolive India for providing access to the SAP system hosted by the Assessee cannot be considered as royalty.
Colgate Palmolive Marketing SDN BHD Vs Commisioner of Income Tax (IT)-2
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31878 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
HC - Bombay HC Upholds DTAA Benefits for Alibaba Singapore; Quashes Sec.148 Notice upholding the Assessee's entitlement to DTAA benefits.
Alibaba.Com Singapore E-Commerce Private Ltd Vs The Commissioner of Income International Taxation-1
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31872 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
HC - Bombay HC Quashes Sec.148 Notice on Settlement of Lawsuit by TCS with US-deputed Employees - Revenue had no reason to believe that the settlement payment for the class action suit was towards a penalty.
Tata Consultancy Services Ltd Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31871 (HC-BOMBAY) · Sections 37(1), 148
-
HC - Bombay HC Quashes Sec.148 Notice on Share Premium, Holds Angel Tax and Sec.68 Amendment Prospective.
SLS Energy Pvt. Ltd Vs Income Tax Officer
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31870 (HC-BOMBAY) · Sections 68, 148
-
FAQ 61 issued by the CBDT, to the extent that it restricts VsV benefit on appeals ‘dismissed in limine’, deserves to be struck down.
Oerlikon Balzers Coating India Private Limited Vs Union of India
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31857 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
HC - Bombay HC Stays Look Out Circular with Imposed Cost
Sanjay Dangi Vs Union of India & Anr
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31839 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
As per Article 24, the exemption or reduction of tax to be allowed under the DTAA in India shall only apply to so much of the income as is remitted to or received in Singapore where the laws in force in Singapore provides that the said income is subject to tax based on the amount remitted or received in Singapore, however, where under the laws in force if the income is subject to tax based on full amount regardless of remission or receipt in Singapore, then Article 24(1) would not apply.
Citicorp Investment Bank (singapore) Ltd. Vs Commissioner Of Income Tax(IT)-2
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31837 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
If there was no commercial expediency, there was no reason for the Assessee to incur these amounts or participate in the rehabilitation scheme of MMC, thus expenditure is deductible under Section 28.
Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd Vs Commissioner of Income Tax
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31820 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 28
-
In the absence of finding that non-recovery of the tax due from the company can be attributed to any gross- negligence, misfeasance or breach of duty on the part of the directors, no order could have been made under Section 179(1) for recovering the same from the directors.
Prakash B. Kamat Vs Principal Commissioner of Income-tax
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31785 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 179
-
Transfer of assessment to DCIT, Jaipur would cause inconvenience and hardship to the Assessee in terms of money and resources, accordingly, the order under Section 127 is liable to be set aside.
Kamal Varandmal Galani Vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-19
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31581 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
Failure on the part of the Assessee to pay the tax in its entirety in respect of the declaration made under section 183 would be deemed to have never been made under the IDS.
Sunil Wamanrao Sakore Vs Union of India
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31535 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
Not only information to be provided but also the material relied upon by the Revenue shall be provided to enable the Assessee to file an effective reply.
Anurag Gupta Vs Income Tax Offcer
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31456 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 148A(b)
-
Reassessment in the name of non-existent company, despite the Revenue being diligently informed about the scheme of amalgamation, is invalid and liable to be quashed.
Sterlite Technologies Limited Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income tax
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31308 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
The dates of the transactions in regard to the Benami properties was indeed before coming into force the 2016 Amendment Act.
Parvesh Construction Pvt. Ltd. & ors Vs Union of India & ors.
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31268 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
Appropriate application of the law and correct advise to the concerned officer can save a lot of litigation and burden on the court as well as agony to the citizens.
Lehman Brothers Investments Pte.Ltd Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31150 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 148
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.