-
Revenue is directed to not give effect to any decision which is adverse to the Assessee's interest for four weeks from service of the order.
Vodafone Mauritius Limited Vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30653 (HC-DELHI)
-
Assessee, merely by filing the revised return of income declaring the maximum credit balance in the said undisclosed bank account, cannot evade the judicial process of law for not disclosing his correct income and foreign account since the year 1991.
Rajinder Kumar Vs STATE & ANR.
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30641 (HC-DELHI)
-
The Revenue, prior to passing of Section 148A(d) order realised that mistake was committed while issuing show cause notice under Section 148A(b), yet it proceeded with the same and even went to the extent of wrong statement in Section 148A(d) order.
Usha Rani Girdhar Vs INCOME TAX OFFICER
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30627 (HC-DELHI) · Section 148A(d)
-
The disallowance made by the Assessee was on an ad hoc basis and a mere guess estimate.
H.T. Media Limited Vs PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30514 (HC-DELHI) · Section 14A
-
VSV Act is neither an amnesty act nor an exemption scheme as it does not provide for any exemption or benefit solely to the taxpayer.
MUFG Bank Ltd Vs COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30513 (HC-DELHI)
-
The facts put forth in the present writ petition are disputed questions of facts, which cannot be adjudicated by a writ court exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Ajay Gupta (HUF) Vs INCOME TAX OFFICE
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30503 (HC-DELHI)
-
Revenue is directed to deal with the contentions and submissions advanced by Assessee and pass fresh Section 148A(d) order within 8 weeks.
The Boeing Company Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30500 (HC-DELHI) · Section 148A(d)
-
Since the penalty order was admittedly passed on Sept 29, 2009, which is beyond the time limit prescribed for completion of penalty proceedings under Section 275(1)(c), the same is barred by limitation.
Rishikesh Buildcon Pvt. Ltd Vs PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-7
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30499 (HC-DELHI)
-
The company which is struck off under Section 248, shall be deemed to continue to be in existence for the purpose of discharging its liabilities.
Ravinder Kumar Aggarwal Vs INCOME TAX OFFICER
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30484 (HC-DELHI) · Section 148
-
Co-ordinate bench of this Court in RKKR foundation has not taken into account the entire conspectus of the legal position in assignment proceedings with reference to the hierarchy of appellate authorities under the Act, 1961 and that the matter requires a deeper consideration.
GPL-RKTCPL JV Vs NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30482 (HC-DELHI)
-
If the assessment order is set aside by the appellate authority, no interest under Section 220(2) can be charged pursuant to the original demand notice.
AT And T Communication Services (India) Pvt. Ltd Vs PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30466 (HC-DELHI)
-
Provisions of Benami Act, 2016 cannot be retrospectively applied to the present case since alleged benami transactions undertaken by the Assessee were entered prior to Nov 1, 2016.
Rajesh Katyal Vs INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30456 (HC-DELHI)
-
For the purpose of Section 154, a mistake apparent on the record must be obvious and not something which can be established by a long process of reasoning on points on which there may conceivably be two opinions.
Ambarnuj Finance And Investment Pvt. Ltd Vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30454 (HC-DELHI)
-
SC directions were given after Revenue conducted search, thus, they cannot form incriminating material found during the search.
PGF Ltd Vs PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)- 3
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30429 (HC-DELHI)
-
Where the Revenue has all the material before him and has framed the original assessment, it's not open for him to reassess to remedy the error resulting from his oversight.
Deepak Kapoor Vs PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30418 (HC-DELHI)
-
Centralised services agreement is merely a subsidiary and ancillary agreement to the main license agreement and would fall within Article 12(4)(a) of India-US DTAA.
WESTIN HOTEL MANAGEMENT LP Vs THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX – INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -3
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30417 (HC-DELHI)
-
Fresh reassessment notice under Section 148 cannot be issued during the subsistence of existing reassessment proceedings for same AY.
Kamdhenu Enterprises Ltd Vs INCOME TAX OFFICER
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30414 (HC-DELHI)
-
Death of the Managing Director of the companies was an extraordinary and exceptional event which would render non-grant of relief on equitable consideration irrational.
I A Housing Solution Private Limited Vs PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30358 (HC-DELHI)
-
There is no requirement that there has to be formal order of condonation of delay to enable Assessee to avail benefit of VsV Act.
Medeor Hospital Limited Vs PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30348 (HC-DELHI)
-
The absence of registration of the assignment under the Trademark Act, 1999 does not disentitle the Assessee from asserting ownership in a trademark.
Daikin Shri Ram Aircon Pvt Ltd Vs COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30318 (HC-DELHI)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.