-
S. 147: Even if the claim for s. 80-IA deduction is contrary to Pandian Chemicals 262 ITR 278 (SC) and Liberty India 317 ITR 218 (SC), the assessment cannot be reopened (beyond 4 years) in the absence of tangible material. The reasons recorded for the reopening cannot be improved or supplemented later
Woodward Governor (India) Ltd vs. ACIT
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11433 (HC-DELHI) · Section 147
-
HC - Writ allowed - Revenue to examine refund claims and pass appropriate orders despite scrutiny notices issued u/s 143(2).
Indus Towers Limited and Others vs. UOI and Ors
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11375 (HC-DELHI) · Section. 143(2)
-
HC - Advance tax amounts were not refundable where the return was in effect a nullity.
Shakti Bhog Foods Limited vs. DCIT and Anr.
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11215 (HC-DELHI) · Section. 4(1)
-
HC - No condonation of delay of 660 days in re- filing of the appeals in absence of ‘sufficient cause’. Revenue's appeal dismissed.
DIT. Vs. JC Bamford Excavators Limited
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11105 (HC-DELHI)
-
HC - Expenses towards consolidation of land was not liable to deduction of tax at source u/s 194H.
Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-4 Versus Invecon Pvt. Ltd.
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11027 (HC-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=66192&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - TPO is directed to take into account 30% additional cost base to account "free of cost" material and revised the OP/TC margin of 13.65% for determining the arm's length margin.
Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax -02 Versus Bombardier Transportation India Pvt. Ltd
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11026 (HC-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=66193&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Section 13 does not debar the main whole-time trustee/trustees from meeting their basic needs from the funds of the institution/trust particularly when they are not deriving any monetary benefit from the institution/trust.
Commissioner Of Income Tax (E) Versus Tsurphu Labrang
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11025 (HC-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=66194&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
S. 14A Rule 8D: The AO must examine the accounts closely and determine if at all any expenditure could be ascribed to the tax exempt dividend/interest earned by the assessee. If the tax exempted income was earned without the interference of any employee the question of attributing any expenditure cannot arise at all
Pradeep Khanna vs. ACIT
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10957 (HC-DELHI) · Section 14A
-
S. 80IA(2A): As the words "derived from" are absent, there is no requirement to prove "first degree nexus" of the receipts with the eligible business. All receipts of the undertaking are eligible for 100% deduction
Pr. CIT vs. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10800 (HC-DELHI) · Section 80IA(2A)
-
HC - Payment to Steria France for the managerial services provided cannot be taxed as FTS and are not liable to withholding of tax u/s 195.
Steria (India) Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Income Tax-VI & Anr.
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10797 (HC-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=65837&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Since the question whether TDS had to be deducted under Section 194-C or 194-I of the Act was not a settled one. No Penalty u/s 271C.
Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. Versus Joint Commissioner of Income Tax
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10794 (HC-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=65872&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Reassessment treating income from licensing premises as business income u/s 28 and not “income from house property” is invalid.
Agya Ram vs. CIT
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10792 (HC-DELHI)
-
S. 43B: Issue of debentures to fund the interest liability does not amount to “actual payment” of the interest so as to qualify for deduction under Explanation 3C to Section 43-B
CIT vs. M. M. Aqua Technologies Ltd
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10770 (HC-DELHI) · Section 43B
-
S. 9(1)(vi): Though in Infrasoft 220 Taxman 273 (Del) the impact of the amendment to s. 9(1)(vi) on the question whether consideration received for sale of pre-packaged software was “royalty” or “fee for technical services” or "business income" was not examined, it is not required to be examined because u/s 90 (3) provides that the Act prevails only if it is more beneficial compared to the DTAA
CIT vs. Halliburton Export Inc
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10651 (HC-DELHI) · Section 9(1)(vi)
-
HC - The reasons for reopening was merely to repeat the words of the statute that there has been a failure by assessee to disclose material particulars. This is certainly not sufficient as far as the legal requirement is concerned.
M/s Alcatel-Lucent France And Another Versus Assistant Director of Income Tax
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10310 (HC-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=65195&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Law on whether "installation or construction activity" constitutes a PE under Article 5 and whether "mobilisation/ demobilisation charges" can be treated as "royalty" u/s 9 (1) (vi) & Article 12 (3) (b) of the DTAA and whether "installation charges" could be treated as "Fees for Technical Services" under Explanation 2 below s. 9 (1) (vii) read with Article 12 (4) (a) of the India-Singapore DTAA explained
Technip Singapore Pte. Ltd. vs. DIT
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10296 (HC-DELHI) · Section. 9 (1) (vi)
-
HC - Higher depreciation @ 60% allowable on LAN/WAN equipments being computers’ essential part.
Principal CIT. vs. Oriental Bank of Commerce
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10253 (HC-DELHI)
-
HC - Order u/s 143(3) read with Sec 144C was not passed within the prescribed time-limit as Revenue could not prove service of final assessment order u/s 144C on assessee.
ST Microelectronics Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT & ORS.
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10249 (HC-DELHI)
-
S. 143(1)/ 147: Entire law on the reopening of s. 143(1) assessments in the light of Zuari Estate Development 373 ITR 661 (SC) explained
Indu Lata Rangwala vs. DCIT
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10242 (HC-DELHI) · Sections 143(1), 147
-
Entire law on what constitutes a Permanent Establishment (PE) in India in terms of Article 5(1), 5(2)(l) or Article 5(5) of the Indo-USA DTAA explained. If the alleged PE has been assessed on ALP basis in terms of Article 7, no income has escaped escapement so as to justify issue of s. 148 notice
Adobe Systems Inc vs. ADIT
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10233 (HC-DELHI)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.