-
HC - Reappreciation and reappraisal of the same factual material by CIT u/s 263 is impermissible.
CIT. vs. Reliance Communication Ltd.
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10074 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
HC - Rejected revenue’s erroneous interpretation that even prima facie merits cannot be considered by him while exercising his powers of stay u/s 220(6).
Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation vs. CIT
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10042 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
Strictures passed against high-handed and unfair approach of AO (IRS Officer) in refusing to give an acknowledgement of stay application. Chief CIT directed to ensure such behaviour is not repeated. Dept directed to nominate another AO to hear stay application
Piramal Fund Management Pvt. Ltd vs. DCIT
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10041 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
S. 220(6): Dept directed to redeposit moneys collected illegally by attachment of assessee’s bank account during pendency of stay application. A order passed on a stay application must give reasons for the refusal to stay the demand
Khandelwal Laboratories Pvt. Ltd vs. DCIT
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10040 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 220(6)
-
S. 195/ 40(a)(ia): Controversy whether in view of retrospective amendment to s. 195 to provide that s. 195 applies whether or not the non-resident person has a residence or place of business or business connection in India, even commission to non-resident agents for services rendered outside India is liable for TDS u/s 195 and has to suffer disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) to be reconsidered by ITAT
Sesa Resources Ltd vs. DCIT
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10036 (HC-BOMBAY) · Sections 195, 40(a)(ia)
-
HC - No TDS u/s 195 on fees paid by a non-resident bank to non-resident sub-arrangers as the same not taxable as FTS.
Credit Lyonnais Vs. DIT
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10026 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
HC - No Sec 14A disallowance on interest expense in rexpect of investment made in tax-free securities as issue has been concluded in assessee’s favour by co-ordinate bench in its own case.
HDFC Bank Ltd. vs. DCIT
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 9983 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section. 14A
-
HC - For purpose of Sec 74, deemed STCG u/s 50 continues to be long term capital gain. Set off against long term loss allowed.
CIT. vs. Parrys(Eastern) Pvt. Ltd.
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 9964 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section. 50
-
HC - Without passing draft assessment order as mandated by DRP provisions u/s 144C(1), final assessment order is invalid.
International Air Transport Association vs. DCIT
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 9963 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
S. 271(1)(c): Penalty is not leviable on income declared during survey and offered in return. Law laid down in Mak Data 358 ITR 593 (SC) is distinguishable on facts and not universally applicable. A mere change of head of income does not attract penalty
CIT. vs. Hiralal Doshi
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 9962 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section. 271(1)(c)
-
S. 37(1): Expenditure in respect of a project which did not materialize has to be treated as revenue expenditure as not capital asset comes into existence
CIT vs. Manganese Ore India Limited
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 9956 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 37(1)
-
S. 147: Law laid down in DCIT vs. Zuari Estate Development and Investment Co 373 ITR 661 does not mean that in cases where no assessment order is passed and assessment is completed by Intimation u/s 143(1), the sine qua non to show that there is "reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment" is not required. It is open to the assessee to challenge a notice issued u/s 148 as being without jurisdiction for absence of reason to believe even in case where the assessment has been completed earlier by Intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act
Khubchandani Healthparks Pvt. Ltd vs. ITO
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 9955 (HC-BOMBAY) · Sections 147, 148, 143(1)
-
HC - It is still open for assessee to challenge Sec 148 notice where assessment was concluded u/s 143(1).
Khubchandani Healthparks Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 9953 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section. 143(1)
-
HC - Receipt of non-compete amount in tranches before retirement and also before the date of non-compete agreement is axable as profit in lieu of salary u/s 17(ii).
B. L. Shah vs ACIT
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 9937 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
Sec. 172 No TDS on payment to non–resident shipping companies
CIT. vs. V.S. Dempo & Co. Pvt. Ltd.
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 9910 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section. 172
-
Transfer Pricing: Companies with large turnover like Infosys & Wipro are not comparable to companies with smaller turnover and should be excluded from the list of comparables
CIT vs. Pentair Water India Pvt. Ltd
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 9899 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
HC - Interest/Refund available u/s 244A on TDS withheld in advance which was subsequently waived.
Sunflag Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. vs. CBDT and Anr.
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 9826 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 244A
-
High Court Shocked At Loot Of Taxpayers Funds By Corrupt Babus. Calls For Non-Cooperation Movement By Taxpayers To Eradicate "Hydra Headed Monster" Of Corruption
Pralhad @ Pratap s/o Tanbaji Pawar vs. State of Maharashtra
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 9821 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
No TDS u/s 195 for shipping-company assessed u/s 172.
CIT vs. V.S. Dempo & Co. Pvt. Ltd.
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 9818 (HC-BOMBAY) · Sections 172, 195
-
HC - Re-assessment order passed without disposing assessee’s objections to reasons for reopening quashed in writ.
Bayer Material Science Pvt Ltd vs. DCIT
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 9811 (HC-BOMBAY)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.