-
HC - The applicant had a complete opportunity to pursue the legal issue as there was no decision of the Jurisdictional High Court. It cannot be held that once the applicant by his own volition had decided to accept a judicial order, the applicant can at any time assail the same may be for the reason that subsequently new decisions are rendered on that issue.
Somerset Place Co-operative Housing Society Ltd vs. ITO
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5404 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
HC - A new ruling is no ground for reviewing a previous judgment. Also entire law on condonation of delay u/s 260A explained
Somerset Place Co-operative Housing Society Ltd vs. ITO
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5396 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 260A
-
HC - Merely because certain attributes, like fixed remuneration, leave rules, fixed timings were applicable, doctors not employees of assessee hospital, TDS u/s 194J applicable on doctors remuneration and not u/s 192.
CIT vs. Grant Medical Foundation
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5379 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
HC - Dept is not entitled to challenge the ITAT's decision to determine the interest rate ALP of funds advanced to AE as per Euribor if the earlier ITAT judgements relied upon by ITAT have not been challenged by the Dept
CIT vs. Tata Autocomp Systems Ltd
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5375 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
HC - Returns filed electronically within due-date prescribed u/s 139(1) are valid returns, even though ITR-V were filed belatedly.
CIT. vs. Borkar Packaging Pvt Ltd.
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5374 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
HC - Unless Revenue sets out reasons either in appeal memo or on affidavit as to why the ratio of earlier orders inapplicable, appeal will not be entertained.
CIT. vs. Smt. Veena Gope Shroff
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5371 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
HC - Unaccounted Sales - It is not the entire sales consideration which is to be brought to tax but only the profit attributable on the total unrecorded sales consideration which alone can be subject to income tax
CIT. Vs. Hariram Bhambhani
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5369 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
HC - Revision u/s 263 - If a query is raised during assessment proceedings and responded to by the assessee, the mere fact that it is not dealt with in the assessment Order would not lead to a conclusion that no mind had been applied to it
CIT. Vs. Fine Jewellery (India) Ltd.
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5368 (HC-BOMBAY) · Saction. 263
-
HC - Uniformity in treatment is the basis premise of rule of law. The Dept cannot arbitrarily pick and choose which orders of the ITAT should be challenged in the High Court. If ITAT has followed an order which is not challenged by the Dept then an affidavit must be filed explaining the distinguishing features which warrants the different view
CIT. Vs. State Bank Of India
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5367 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
HC - Doctors drawing variable pay with or without contract and doctors drawing fixed plus variable pay; TDS applicable u/s 194J and not u/s 192
The Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Pune Versus Grant Medical Foundation (RUBY Hall Clinic)
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5359 (HC-BOMBAY) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=60380&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
S. 234E: The late filing of TDS returns by the deductor causes inconvenience to everyone and s. 234E levies a fee to regularize the said late filing. The fee is not in the guise of a tax nor is it onerous. The levy is constitutionally valid
Rashmikant Kundalia vs. UOI
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5307 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 234E
-
HC - Loss on sale of shares in subsidiary is allowed as business loss on commercial expediency principles
CIT. Vs. Colgate Palmolive (India) Ltd.
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5244 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
HC - Since transaction of purchase of land was in nature of an adventure in trade, sum received in pursuance of consent decree was liable to tax as business income under section 28(iv) and not as capital gain
Ramesh Babulal Shah v. Commissioner of Income-tax
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5219 (HC-BOMBAY) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=59305&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Since issue was settled by earlier High Court order and no ground for pressing appeal against settled issue was given in "appeal memo", therefore, appeal file by the revenue is dismissed. High Court imposed cost personally on CIT in order to discourage casual appeals
CIT vs. Proctor and Gamble Home Products Ltd
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5144 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
HC - S. 2(22)(e) has to be construed strictly. If assessee is not a shareholder of lending co, s. 2(22)(e) does not apply even if funds are ultimately paid by Co in which assessee is a shareholder
CIT. vs. Jignesh P. Shah
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5142 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 2(22)(e)
-
HC - If the assessment order is to be disturbed, then the Assessing Officer must strictly satisfy the condition precedent as provided under Section 147/148 before he can issue a notice, seeking to reopen an assessment.
GKN Sinter Metals Ltd. (Formerly Mahindra Sintered Products Ltd.) Versus Ms. Ramapriya Raghavan, The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 2(1) And Others
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5117 (HC-BOMBAY) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=59186&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - There has been a change in opinion and consequently no jurisdiction to the AO to reopen the assessment as per Sec 147. Assesse's 'writ' allowed
GKN Sinter Metals Ltd vs. ACIT
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5088 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
HC - Assessee could not be made to suffer or account of lapse on part of Assessing officer or any other officer of department
Plasticotes Investments (P.) Ltd. v. Chief Commissioner of Income-tax
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5073 (HC-BOMBAY) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=57846&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Sweeper, peons, manager, clerk not participating in manufacturing process, need to be excluded from number of employees to find out eligibility in terms of section 80-IA
Herald Publications (P.) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Panjim
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5063 (HC-BOMBAY) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=58572&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Once the finding of fact is that all the materials are for creating the manufacturing facility and which has definitely an enduring benefit, disallowable under Sec. 37(1)
Schindler India (P.) Ltd. v. Joint Commissioner of Income-tax
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5017 (HC-BOMBAY) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=59084&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.