Search
Advanced Search Search with field filters
/adv
Navigation
Home Go to homepage
/home
Direct Tax Income Tax resources
GST GST Acts, Rules & Case Laws
Company Law Companies Act & SEBI
Due Date Tracker Statutory compliance deadlines
/due
Due Date Calendar Calendar view of compliance deadlines
Daily Digest Today's tax updates and articles
/digest
Landmark Rulings

Delhi High Court — Direct Tax

1,066 rulings

  1. Delhi High Court · 06 Feb 2015
    HC - Royalty payments under “know-how agreement” for 10yrs for use of technology license is allowable revenue expenditure u/s 37(1) as there was no enduring-benefit. In the automobile industry, technology upgradation is constant and rapid.

    CIT vs. Hero Honda Motors Limited

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5287 (HC-DELHI)

  2. Delhi High Court · 25 Dec 2014
    HC - Sale consideration for transfer of shares was artificially and deceitfully bifurcated under a sham agreement which was unreal.

    CIT. Vs. Shiv Raj Gupta

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5243 (HC-DELHI)

  3. Delhi High Court · 03 Feb 2015
    HC - Royalty/technical service fee paid to foreign principals for grant of technology license is allowable u/s 37(1) on the ground of commercial expediency. Commercial expediency means everything that serves to promote trade and commerce and includes every means suitable to that end…includes such expenditure as a prudent man may incur for the purpose of his business

    CIT. Vs. Yum Restaurants (I) Pvt. Ltd.

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5220 (HC-DELHI)

  4. Delhi High Court · 04 Feb 2015
    HC - The issue whether the assessee had held the mutual funds as investment or sold them for earning profits to be taxed as business income is a complex and vexed one. Matter remanded for fresh consideration by Tribunal

    Commissioner of Income-tax v. Central News Agency (P.) Ltd.

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5184 (HC-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=58088&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip

  5. Delhi High Court · 04 Feb 2015
    HC - For the purpose of section 278B, once the offence is shown to have been committed by the company, then the liability of the directors in charge of its affairs is attracted. The burden then shifts to such directors to show that the offence occurred without their knowledge or that they had exercised all due diligence to prevent the commission of such offence.

    Income-tax Officer v. Anil Batra

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5183 (HC-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=58238&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip

  6. Delhi High Court · 03 Feb 2015
    HC - Activities of compiling and collating text, designing the layout, scanning and digital image editing, constitute "manufacture" or "production". E-book development eligible for exemption u/s 10B

    CIT vs. Kiran Kapoor

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5163 (HC-DELHI)

  7. Delhi High Court · 02 Feb 2015
    HC - View in Alcatel Lucent that assessee must pay interest for short-fall of advance-tax if it induced payee not to deduct TDS cannot be followed. View in Jacobs has to be followed because obligation of payer to deduct TDS is absolute & not dependent on assertion of payee.

    DIT vs. GE Packaged Power Inc

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5161 (HC-DELHI) · Section 234B

  8. Delhi High Court · 02 Feb 2015
    HC - Entertainment tax subsidy is a capital receipt even though the source is the public who visit the cinema hall after it becomes operational

    CIT vs. Bougainvillea Multiplex Entertainment

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5158 (HC-DELHI)

  9. Delhi High Court · 27 Jan 2015
    HC - ‘Served from India’ brand can’t be construed to include only brands of Indian Companies, which are recognized as IndianIndian subsidiaries of foreign companies can claim SFIS benefit

    Yum Restaurants (I) Pvt. Ltd. V. Union of India

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5154 (HC-DELHI)

  10. Delhi High Court · 23 Jan 2015
    HC - If the definition of "charitable purpose" is construed literally, it is violative of the principles of equality & unconstitutional. If the dominant object is not to carry on business or trade or commerce, then an incidental or ancillary activity for which a fee is charged does not destroy the character of a charitable institution

    India Trade Promotion Organization vs. DGIT

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5141 (HC-DELHI) · Section 2(15), 10(23C)(iv)

  11. Delhi High Court · 21 Jan 2015
    HC - The sine quo non for action under Section 147 (to deal with escapement of income) is gathering or availability of some “tangible material” requiring the matter to be re-opened. Assessment cannot be reopened in the absence of "fresh material"

    Donaldson India Filters Systems Pvt. Ltd vs. DCIT

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5110 (HC-DELHI) · Section 147

  12. Delhi High Court · 14 Jan 2015
    HC - Valuation norms under the Excise Act not relevant for the purpose of allowing u/s 37(1). Hire charges incurred on plastic moulds, though given 'free-of-cost' to contract manufacturers, the same is allowable as hire charges incurred "for the purpose of business"

    CIT. Vs. Tupperware India Pvt Ltd.

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5085 (HC-DELHI) · Section. 37(1)

  13. Delhi High Court · 13 Jan 2015
    HC - There is no non-disclosure as the assessee-Australian company had made it clear in the computation that the rate of tax applicable was 15 per cent in view of the article 11(2). No reassessment on the ground that tax was to be levied at rate of 40 per cent.

    Standard Chartered Grindlays (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Director of Income-tax (International Taxation), Circle 2(2), New Delhi

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5071 (HC-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=58511&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip

  14. Delhi High Court · 12 Jan 2015
    HC - The reasons must have live nexus and must disclose on what basis or evidence the Assessing Officer feels and has reason to believe that income chargeable has escaped assessment. The reasons must be germane and genuine

    Commissioner of Income Tax - 15 (Erstwhile CIT-IX) Versus Shri Chintoo Tomar

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5053 (HC-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=59110&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip

  15. Delhi High Court · 12 Jan 2015
    HC - Penalty u/s 271G - Penalty cannot be imposed unless and until the Assessing Officer is sure and certain that there was a violation. Ambiguity or doubt in the mind of the Assessing Officer does not justify imposition of penalty, when the actus reas itself is not proved and established

    The Commissioner of Income Tax-II Versus M/s. Johnson Matthey India P. Ltd.

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5052 (HC-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenINTL.aspx?ID=7802&Category=INTLDecisions&CategoryType=Zip

  16. Delhi High Court · 10 Jan 2015
    HC - The entitlement of an assessee to a deduction depends on the relevant provision of law and not on the manner of accounting followed by the assessee. No disallowance under sec. 43B on unpaid differential price of sugarcane as there was no clear and ascertained legal liability till the date that the Supreme court upheld the notification.

    Commissioner of Income-tax (LTU) v. Dalmia Bharat Sugar & Industries Ltd.

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5035 (HC-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=59085&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip

  17. Delhi High Court · 03 Dec 2014
    ITAT - Cost of Furniture in Computation of Capital Gain on Property Sale is not deductible. Most of the items are primarily personal effects which are excluded from the definition of capital asset under Section 2(14) if they are meant for personal use.

    Shri Sachinder Mohan Mehta Vs. ACIT

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 4990 (HC-DELHI)

  18. Delhi High Court · 06 Jan 2015
    HC - Expenditure incurred in credit card business on account of credit investigation to verify information and data provided by prospective customers for issue of credit cards, is part of running cost, to be allowed as revenue expenditure

    Commissioner of Income-tax-III v. SBI Cards & Payment Services (P.) Ltd.

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 4963 (HC-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=58471&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip

  19. Delhi High Court · 30 Dec 2014
    HC - Since assessee was having two clearly separate portfolios for shares i.e., investment and stock in trade, gain arising on sale of shares couldn't be held as business income if sale was made from investment portfolio

    Commissioner of Income-tax-II v. M.G. Share & Stock (P.) Ltd.

    (2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 4894 (HC-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=58028&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip

  20. Delhi High Court · 24 Nov 2014
    HC - Advertisement expense cannot be disallowed simply on the ground that these were exorbitant

    CIT. Vs. Discovery Communication India

    (2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 4893 (HC-DELHI)

Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.


An unhandled error has occurred. Reload ×

Rejoining the server...

Rejoin failed... trying again in seconds.

Failed to rejoin.
Please retry or reload the page.

The session has been paused by the server.

Failed to resume the session.
Please retry or reload the page.