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

Karnataka High Court — Direct Tax

371 rulings

  1. Karnataka High Court · 18 Oct 2022
    As per Section 131(1) the jurisdictional AO was supposed to issue the summons, however in the present case the summons has been issued by Deputy Director of Income Tax Unit-2(3), who is not having jurisdiction.

    Partha Pratim Ghosh Vs The Income Tax Department

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30278 (HC-KARNATKATA)

  2. Karnataka High Court · 17 Oct 2022
    The delay in filing the return of income was not willful but occurred on account of financial hardships.

    Manyata Projects (P) Ltd Vs The Income Tax Department By its Income Tax Officer

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30270 (HC-KARNATKATA)

  3. Karnataka High Court · 12 Oct 2022
    Liability to deduct tax at source under Section 201 only arises when it is required to be deducted under the provisions of the Act.

    Special Tahsildar Land Acquisition (General) Vs PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30236 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Section 201(1A)

  4. Karnataka High Court · 21 Sep 2022
    Software will be written in binary code and it is intangible and can be used only when loaded onto a compatible hardware, thus hardware becomes an integral part of the exported commodity.

    Subex Limited Vs THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30106 (HC-KARNATKATA)

  5. Karnataka High Court · 14 Sep 2022
    Revenue is liable to pay refund of Rs.21.48 Lacs to Assessee along with the applicable interest and allows Assessee’s petition.

    M. Tech Holdings PTE Limited Vs THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30062 (HC-KARNATKATA)

  6. Karnataka High Court · 13 Aug 2022
    The notice issued to Assessee under Section 148 and the corrigendum issued thereafter were both time barred since issued after the period of six years from the end of relevant AY.

    INFINEON TECHNOLOGIES AG Vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29890 (HC-KARNATKATA)

  7. Karnataka High Court · 09 Aug 2022
    The appeals are non-maintainable on the basis that the impugned orders were order of discharge which could only be subjected to revisionary proceedings under Section 397(1) of Cr.P.C.

    Lokmanya Multipurpose Co-Op Society Ltd Vs THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29855 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Section 276CC

  8. Karnataka High Court · 16 Jul 2022
    ITAT’s order upholding levy of wealth tax is not sustainable where possession of properties assessed to wealth tax was transferred to another entity with which assessee entered into a development agreement.

    M/S. NOORANI PROPERTIES (P) LTD Vs THE COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29705 (HC-KARNATKATA)

  9. Karnataka High Court · 12 Jul 2022
    It would be incongruous to construe sub -clause (vi) of section 2 (19AA) as to mean a running unit.

    KBD Sugars And Distilleries Ltd Vs THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29670 (HC-KARNATKATA)

  10. Karnataka High Court · 08 Jul 2022
    Having taken a specific stand before the ITAT that the Contracts is a composite one, the Revenue cannot be permitted to take a contradictory stand before this Court.

    Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Limited Vs THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29649 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Section 194J

  11. Karnataka High Court · 25 Jun 2022
    Finding under Section 195 is tentative and even if Revenue orders that no deduction of tax be made, the question of taxability of recipient still remains to be decided.

    Flipkart Internet Private Limited Vs THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29524 (HC-KARNATKATA)

  12. Karnataka High Court · 07 Apr 2021
    Until and unless it is determined that the unaccounted transactions unearthed during search were liable for payment of tax, penalty or interest, no prosecution could be launched on the ground of attempt to evade such tax, penalty or interest.

    D K Shivakumar Vs ASSISTANT/DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29468 (HC-KARNATKATA)

  13. Karnataka High Court · 09 Apr 2021
    Language in Secs. 194C/J/H/I mandates deduction of tax at source by a person who makes the payment.

    Toyota Kirloskar Motor (P) Ltd Vs INCOME TAX OFFICER

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29451 (HC-KARNATKATA)

  14. Karnataka High Court · 12 Apr 2021
    The order passed by Tribunal is bereft of any reasoning and suffers from the vice of non-application of mind. The Tribunal which is a final fact finding authority has to assign reasons in support of its decision.

    GMR Sports Pvt. Ltd Vs PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29397 (HC-KARNATKATA)

  15. Karnataka High Court · 12 Apr 2021
    Since the provision was either not unworkable nor was inconsistent with other provisions of the Act, therefore applying principle of reading down merely on the basis of hardship or equity are not relevant in the interpretation of the law relating to taxation.

    A. Kowsalya Bai Vs UNION OF INDIA

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29396 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Sections 206AA, 139A

  16. Karnataka High Court · 11 Jun 2022
    There should be no impediment to the appellate Tribunal to consider the petitioners’ grounds even as regards the Rate.

    Palmer Investment Group Limited Vs THE DEPUTY COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29354 (HC-KARNATKATA)

  17. Karnataka High Court · 21 Apr 2021
    In view the fact that material on the basis of which order has been passed was not furnished to the appellant at any point, the order passed by Tribunal is certainly violative of principles of natural justice and fair play.

    Google India Private Ltd Vs THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29309 (HC-KARNATKATA)

  18. Karnataka High Court · 29 Apr 2021
    Since the assessee received inputs from its customers, it was not engaged in original work, to be characterized either as ‘computer software’ or as a ‘IT enabled service provider under engineering and design’.

    Marmon Food and Beverage Technologies India (P) Ltd Vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29293 (HC-KARNATKATA)

  19. Karnataka High Court · 26 Apr 2021
    If there is a benefit conferred by legislation, the said benefit being legislative object, there would be a presumption that such a legislation would operate with retrospective effect by giving a purposive construction.

    Texas Instruments India Pvt. Ltd Vs THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29289 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Section 80JJAA

  20. Karnataka High Court · 25 May 2022
    If one more opportunity is granted to Assessee and the compounding of offence is permitted, no prejudice would cause to the Revenue.

    Nasiruddin Vs PRINCIPAL DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29156 (HC-KARNATKATA)

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.