-
HC - For sec. 32A allowance, date of original purchase contract is relevant and not date of revised one,
Shaily Eng. Plastics (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (Asst.)
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6452 (HC-GUJARAT) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=61055&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Assessment u/s 143(3) is void ab initio since the notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued beyond the period of limitation
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II Versus GUJARAT FOILS LIMITED
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6444 (HC-GUJARAT) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=61024&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Professional outstanding fee received by advocate from his client after elevated to post of High Court's Judge would not be taxable u/s 4.
Commissioner of Income-tax v. Anil R. Dave
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6441 (HC-GUJARAT) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=61049&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Where assessee distributed gifts without TDS as it was under a bona fide belief that gift coupons being in nature of mementos were not in nature of payment of salary, was to be accepted and, penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was not exigible.
Commissioner of Income-tax (TDS) v. Indian Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd.
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6413 (HC-GUJARAT) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=59069&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - ITAT justified in deleting the deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) on the ground that assessee company is not a registered share holder of the lender company
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Ram Shipping Industries Pvt. Ltd.
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6401 (HC-GUJARAT) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=60993&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Tribunal was right in law in deleting penalty imposed on assessee under section 158BFA(2) as assessee had paid full tax along with interest for income disclosed in search.
Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax,CC-2, Baroda v. Natubhai M. Makwana
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6350 (HC-GUJARAT) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=60988&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - The director is required to be put in notice by formulation of the tentative ground as to why corporate veil should not be invoked and if justifiable ground proved, competent authority may form an opinion whether to lift veil or not. Director, cannot be called upon u/s 179 to pay outstanding public limited company dues without notice.
Ajay S Patel vs. ITO
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6309 (HC-GUJARAT) · Section. 179
-
HC - Immunity against penalty under Expl 5 to S. 271(1)(c) is available even if return is not filed provided a statement is made during the search, explaining the manner of deriving the income and due tax & interest thereon is paid
Kirit Dayabhai Patel vs. ACIT
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6303 (HC-GUJARAT) · Section. S. 271(1)(c)
-
HC - Slump sale was effected and factory was in operation, thereafter interest could not be capitalized.
Commissioner of Income-tax- IV v. Sandvik Chokshi Ltd.
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6122 (HC-GUJARAT) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=59146&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - When the application for stay is to be considered and decided, it would be required for concerned authority to record reasons and then to reach to the ultimate conclusion as to whether the stay should be granted or not and if yes on what condition. In absence of any reasons, the order cannot be sustained.
Hitech Outsourcing Services v. Income-tax Officer-Ward 6 (2)
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6025 (HC-GUJARAT) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=59307&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Interest was rightly charged under section 234B(4) despite fact that no interest had been levied under section 234B(1) at time of framing regular assessment.
AIMS Oxygen Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of Income-tax
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5992 (HC-GUJARAT) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=58861&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - The income from the transactions recorded in the seized diary should be determined on the basis of highest peak, as increased by the net profit of 5 per cent on the receipts.
Commissioner of Income-tax- III v. Tirupati Construction Co.
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5965 (HC-GUJARAT) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=58655&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - As per CBDT guideline, employer contribution in corpus was acceptable, therefore CIT could not deny sec. 10(23AAA) approval to 'employees welfare trust' due to payment of corpus by employer
KPT Employees Welfare Trust v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Rajkot-I
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5905 (HC-GUJARAT) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=59258&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - When there was no occasion for the asset to enter the block of assets of the purposes of computing depreciation under section 32 then gain arising on sale could not be taxed under section 50 as short-term capital gain but as long-term capital gains.
Income-tax Officer v. Parikh Transport Co.
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5904 (HC-GUJARAT) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=58859&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Explanation added to Section 80 IB(9) retrospectively by Finance Act (No.2) of 2009 is unconstitutional, violative of Article 14 of the Constitution and is liable to be struck down
Niko Resources Limited vs. UOI
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5890 (HC-GUJARAT) · Section 80-IB(9)
-
HC - It is only the income from such investment or deposit which has been made in violation of section 11(5) of the Act that is liable to be taxed and violation under section 13(1)(d) does not result in denial of exemption under section 11 to the total income of the assessee and that where the whole or part of the relevant income is not exempted under section 11 by virtue of violation of section 13(1) (d) of the Act, tax shall be levied on the relevant income or part of the relevant income at the maximum marginal rate.
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Versus ORPAT CHARITABLE TRUST
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5835 (HC-GUJARAT) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=60663&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - It was not permissible for assessee to revise application under section 245C and he was to pay additional tax in terms of original application.
Pukhraj Bhabhutmal Shah v. Income-tax Officer
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5812 (HC-GUJARAT) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=58797&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Depreciation on swimming pool at the rate of 33.33 per cent treating it as plant and machinery in case of a hotel is not justified.
Commissioner of Income-tax v. Cama Hotels Ltd.
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5805 (HC-GUJARAT) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=58868&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - At time of granting approval under section 80G, only object of trust is required to be examined without considering application of income. Rejection on ground that Trust had not spent 85 per cent of amount towards object of trust is not valid.
Commissioner of Income-tax, Rajkot-III v. Vipassana Trust
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5770 (HC-GUJARAT) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=59027&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Since assessee had submitted all material facts fully and truly in support of its claim alongwith audit report, in view of proviso to section 147, Assessing Officer could not initiate reassessment proceedings after expiry of four years alleging wrong allowance of expenditure.
SKY Diamonds v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5690 (HC-GUJARAT) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=60435&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.