-
S. 54F is a beneficial provision & must be interpreted liberally. It does not require that the construction of the new residential house has to be completed, and the house be habitable, within 3 years of the transfer of the old asset. It is sufficient if the funds are invested in the new house property within the time limit
CIT. vs. B. S. Shantakumari
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 9210 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Section. 54F
-
HC - No TDS u/s 194LA on land acquired through ‘voluntary surrender’ by land-owners in lieu of development rights.
CIT. vs. Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagar Palike
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 9190 (HC-KARNATKATA)
-
HC - Credit purchases are nothing but expenditure and if sundry credits are not proved, addition can be made by resorting to section 69C.
P.M. Abdulla vs. ITO
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 9108 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Section. 69C
-
HC - Estimation of income should be based on income of that preceding year which is closer to relevant year
S.L. Basavaraj (HUF) v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-1, Shimoga
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 9068 (HC-KARNATKATA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=62018&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Even in cases where the agreement was oral, the transactions with lorry owners/transporters fall within the ambit of Sec 194C.
CIT. vs. Maruti Subray Patil
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 9054 (HC-KARNATKATA)
-
HC - Sec 4 & 5 of Income tax Act are subject to Sec 90 and by necessary implication they are subject to the terms of the double taxation avoidance agreement.
Wipro Limited vs. DCIT
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 9029 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Sections. 4, 5
-
Karnataka HC directs CBDT to Consider representation on Tax Audit/ ITR Due Date Extension
Karnataka State Chartered Accountants Association, Sri. Raveendra S. Kore Vs. Union of India, Central Board of Direct Taxes
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 8967 (HC-KARNATKATA)
-
HC - Due-date extension is a matter in Govt. domain. CBDT to consider peremptorily representations.
Karnataka State Chartered Accountants Association
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 8964 (HC-KARNATKATA)
-
HC - Exemption u/s 54F available even though assessee did not deposit amount in capital-gains account scheme.
CIT. vs. K Ramachandra Rao
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 8747 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Section. 54F
-
HC - Since no demand was raised pursuant to the reassessment order, assessee did not file any appeal, therefore delay of 331 days in filing appeal before CIT(A) is condoned.
CIT. vs. Prakash B Nichani
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 8699 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Section. 263
-
HC - Sec 10A exemption available to assessee even when it was sub-contracting part of its software development work (‘onsite work’) to AEs abroad.
CIT. Vs. Mphasis Software & Service India Pvt Ltd.
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 8624 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Section. 10A
-
HC - Even if the supply contract is an integral part of a composite contract on single sale responsible basis, there is no obligation to deduct TDS u/s 194C/ 194J. Service contracts, not being professional services, are not covered by s. 194J.
CIT vs. Executive Engineer, GESCOM
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 8571 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Sections 194C, 194J
-
HC - Section 234E is constitutionally valid.
M/S LAKSHMINIRMAN BANGALORE PVT LTD. Vs THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 8405 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Section 234E
-
HC - Assessee cannot cry foul at later stage for non-submission of reasons for reopening of assessment if assessee fails to seek reasons earlier.
CIT vs. United Racing & Blood Stock Breeders Pvt. Ltd
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 7148 (HC-KARNATKATA)
-
HC - Surrender of Floor Area Ratio (FAR) relating to land in favour of developer for construction of flats is a transfer u/s 2(47) liable to capital gains tax.
CIT. vs. Dinesh D. Ranka
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 7083 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Section. 2(47)
-
HC - TRO’s order declaring transfer of properties by way of mortgage in favour of a State financial corporation by the borrower, as void u/s 281 is not correct.
CIT. vs. Karnataka State Industrial Investment Development Corporation Ltd.
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 7043 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Section. 281
-
HC - Where assessee purchases a new asset, which is habitable but requires additions, alternations, modifications and improvements, cost of additions or improvements on habitable house will be eligible for sec. 54F relief.
Mrs. Rahana Siraj v. Commissioner of Income-tax-I, Bangalore
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6981 (HC-KARNATKATA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=61362&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Even when assessee had not shown credit amount in their books as due to assessee, once assessee wrote off a claim in its books of account treating it as a bad debt under section 36(1)(vii), r/w 36(2), claim of bad debts was to be allowed in current year.
Amco Batteries Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 11(1), Bangalore
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6976 (HC-KARNATKATA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=61356&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Since all conditions laid down in rule 2BA were fulfilled, SBI employee would be entitled to exemption under section 10(10C) on ex gratia payment.
Commissioner of Income-tax v. Appasaheb Baburao Kamble
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6949 (HC-KARNATKATA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=59278&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Since assessee merely invested funds through ‘PMS’ and there was no separate business infrastructure to carry out its share transactions, profit on sale of shares is to be treated as ‘capital gains’.
CIT. vs. Kapur Investments
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6838 (HC-KARNATKATA)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.