-
A perusal of the impugned order u/s. 281-B does not indicate that the AO formed an opinion about the reasonable likelihood of the recovery becoming difficult due to inadequacy of the assets of the Petitioner.
DABUR INVEST CORP Vs ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19780 (HC-DELHI)
-
The withholding certificate which directed TDS to be deducted at 5% on the payments made by the Indian entities to the Petitioner was unsustainable in law.
Bently Nevada Llc Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1) (2), International Taxation & Anr.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19777 (HC-DELHI) · Section 197
-
Even for the purposes of the penalty order under Section 271(1)(c) read with Section 275(1)(a) the limitation begins to run from the date of the order of the ITAT was served upon the CIT (Judicial).
PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4 VERSUS INDIAN SUGAR EXIM CORPORATION LTD.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19730 (HC-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79323&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Without conducting any inquiry of the fact whether there was any loss on account of the fluctuation in the foreign exchange and rate of the US Dollar within the relevant time, the AO simply disallowed the above amount. This is despite the return being scrutinized under Section 143(3) of the Act.
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- 1 VERSUS M/S. ALBASTA WHOLESALE SERVICES LIMITED
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19721 (HC-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79313&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
This Court is of the view that Rule 4A of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Members (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1963 empowers the Search-Cum-Selection Committee to evolve its own procedure. It is not in dispute that on conjoint reading of Section 252 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and Rule Rule 4A of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Members (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1963, the candidates with less than 20 years of experience can be short-listed and called for interview.
MONICA ANAND KUMAR, HEMANT GUPTA VERSUS UNION OF INDIA
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19703 (HC-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79289&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
What would constitute as being unreasonably high-pitched, obviously differs from case to case.
ANUSHNA ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, HQRS -1 & ORS.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19698 (HC-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79237&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Intimation u/s143(3) could not be treated as an order and hence petition u/s 264 was not maintainable for such intimation.
Epcos Electronic Components S A Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19662 (HC-DELHI) · Section 264
-
Petitioner has sought a clarification regarding the erroneous payment of the surcharge. Indeed the Court finds that the payment of tax on FTS under the DTAA included surcharge and cess etc. There was no requirement that once the tax rate at the appropriate slab was paid, to separately pay the surcharge and cess.
M/S. EPCOS ELECTRONIC COMPONENTS S.A VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19647 (HC-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79182&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The Court is unable to find any legal error committed by the ITAT in dismissing the appeal of the present Appellant.
SUSHIL BANSAL VERSUS PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -19
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19646 (HC-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79183&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
DVO having complete knowledge of the unsigned agreement, which was much lesser than the total amount that was revealed from the two agreements found. It was noted by the ITAT that presumption could only be made under Section 132 (4A) and that too was rebuttable.
THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6 VERSUS BRIJ MOHAN MAHAJAN
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19633 (HC-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79127&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Exercise of sending the matter back to the AO for a fresh assessment pursuant to the impugned order of the PCIT under Section 263 is not warranted.
PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) -2 VERSUS M/S. FORUM AGRO FOODS PVT. LTD.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19616 (HC-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79091&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT should take appropriate steps and expedite hearing of appeals which are pending for a long time, especially in cases wherein the appeal has been pending for over 10 years. ITAT is directed to adjudicate the matter at the earliest, preferably within four months from the passing of the order.
NOKIA SOLUTIONS AND NETWORKS ITALIA SPA Vs THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19592 (HC-DELHI)
-
S. 254: President/ Sr. VP of the ITAT should take appropriate steps and expedite hearing in old appeals. A tabular statement indicating the age of the old appeals as well as an action plan of the ITAT with respect to the likely time for their disposal, having regard to the priorities that ITAT may set in this regard, shall also be filed in court
Nokia Solutions And Networks Italia Spa vs. DDIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19554 (HC-DELHI) · Section 254
-
Re-assessment notice u/s 148 issued beyond 4 years is disallowed, as there was no failure of assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts in original assessment.
Best Cybercity (India) Pvt. Ltd Vs INCOME TAX OFFICER
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19360 (HC-DELHI)
-
Rule 4A of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Members (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1963 empowers the Selection Board to evolve its own procedure.
Puneet Sharma Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19310 (HC-DELHI)
-
When faced with the situation of a software glitch that prevents an Assessee from either filing a return or claiming a benefit, the Courts have repeatedly had to permit the manual filing of return/claims and and have directed the Respondents to act on such manual filing of returns.
Cosmo Films Limited Vs CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES, MINISTRY OF FINANCE
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19295 (HC-DELHI)
-
ITAT Members' Appointment: The action of the Selection Committee of short-listing only 24 candidates for interview out of 649 applications is not violative of Article 14. The criteria of short-listing Advocates in practice for at least 20 years and with income of not less than Rs. 1.40 lakh for post of Judicial Member is rational and reasonable and not arbitrary
Puneet Sharma vs. UOI
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19289 (HC-DELHI)
-
The power to make Rules or remove difficulties under the provisions of Sections 85 and 86 of the said Act, could only be exercised by the Central Government, once the said Act came into force on the 1st April, 2016, the date expressly stipulated by Parliament in this behalf, and not prior thereto.
Gautam Khaitan Vs Union of India & Ors
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19278 (HC-DELHI)
-
The ITAT has rightly drawn a distinction between the royalty payments made by the Assessee to the principal during its formative years and those made in subsequent years when the Assessee was fully operational.
Honda Cars India Ltd Vs THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19277 (HC-DELHI)
-
S. 14A/ Rule 8D: Though, after Maxopp Investment 402 ITR 640 (SC), even "strategic investments" have to be considered for disallowance, the assessee is entitled to contend that the investments are "legacy" or "one-time" and that there is in fact no expenditure incurred to earn the tax-free income
CIT vs. Alpha G. Corp Development Ltd
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19253 (HC-DELHI) · Section 14A
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.