-
The year 2021 was not leap year, thus, Assessee's 30 days period ended on Mar 18, 2021 to file objections which indeed was filed on Mar 16, 2021.
Marvell India Pvt Ltd Vs NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28169 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Section 144C(2)
-
Even in terms of Section 50D, cost of construction would not be the appropriate method to arrive at the full market value of consideration.
Shankar Vittal Motor Co. Ltd. & Another Vs THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28132 (HC-KARNATKATA)
-
AO is directed to pass appropriate order pursuant to the conclusion of proceedings with the DRP.
Azuga Telematics Private Limited Vs The Additional Income Tax officer
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 28001 (HC-KARNATKATA)
-
Once such seizure proceedings are undertaken by the officials of the Department under authorisation, they are not obliged to furnish any document to any public servant in respect of such matters relating to the assessee against whom search and seizure is taken up.
DIRECTOR GENERAL OF INCOME TAX (INVESTIGATION), PR. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INVESTIGATION), PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) VERSUS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, SRI K. GOVINDARAJ, THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27852 (HC-KARNATKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=86050&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - The matter over TDS dispute on year-end ad hoc provisions has to be analysed having regard to, whether income has accrued to the payees to deduct tax at source.
Volvo India Pvt. Ltd Vs INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS)
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27848 (HC-KARNATKATA)
-
HC - The words 'expansion' and 'extension' connote different meanings and cannot be used synonymously for computing deduction u/s 35D as such cost of acquiring 100% stake in companies cannot be treated as cost of the project for the purpose of determining deduction u/s 35D.
Subex Ltd Vs THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27618 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Section 35D
-
HC - Cargo handling services is covered under ‘infrastructure facility’ u/s 80-IA(4).
Menzies Aviation Bobba (Bangalore) Pvt Ltd Vs PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, The DCIT
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27463 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Section 80-IA(4)
-
For the purposes of computing tax payable on the royalty income received, it has to be taxed with reference to the provisions of the agreement (Indo-US DTAA).
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE -1 (2), BENGALURLU VERSUS M/S IBM WORLD TRADE CORPORATION
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27214 (HC-KARNATKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=85549&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Prosecution need not be initiated for an offence under section 276C(2), if the aggregate amount of tax interest and penalty involved is less than ₹ 10,000.
NARENDRAKUMAR VALJI PATEL VERSUS INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT WARD-I, GOKAK
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27070 (HC-KARNATKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=85444&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
There is no original assessment order in the case of the assessee and it was only an intimation under Section 143(1)of the Act, which cannot be treated to be an order.
M/S. THE KARNATAKA STATE CO-OPERATIVE APEX BANK LIMITED VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 3 (1), BANGALORE
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26948 (HC-KARNATKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=85236&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
After the amendment of Section 36(1)(iii) w.e.f. 01.04.2016, the proviso can be attracted to the case of expansion of business which is not applicable to the impugned AY 2010-11.
Coffeeday Global Ltd Vs ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26471 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Section 36(1)(iii)
-
No taxing event has taken place within the territories of India and therefore, the Tribunal was justified in allowing the appeal of the assessee.
Puma Sports India P. Ltd Vs PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26467 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Section 195
-
Expenditure incurred for commercial expediency is allowable as business expenditure and coordinate bench ruling in Karnataka Trade Corporationwhere expenses incurred to perfect title of movable and immovable properties were allowed as business expenditure.
Maya Ventures Private Limited Vs THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26394 (HC-KARNATKATA)
-
Payments made by the assessee was not royalty as defined under Explanation 2 to Section 9(1)(vi), and under the applicable DTAAs, giving rise to an income chargeable to tax in India and necessitating deduction of tax u/s 195.
Technicolor India Pvt Ltd Vs INCOME-TAX OFFICER
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26393 (HC-KARNATKATA)
-
An act which is otherwise valid in law cannot be treated as non est merely on the basis of some underlying motive supposedly resulting in some economic detriment or prejudice to the national interest.
Vikram Reddy Vs COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26380 (HC-KARNATKATA)
-
It is not for the revenue to decide how the incentive has to be paid by the assessee and the revenue cannot sit in an armchair of the businessman and to decide as to the manner in which payment has to be made.
Karnataka State Co-Operative Apex Bank Ltd Vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26367 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Section 37
-
The company was benefitted as the building was let out to it at much lower than market rate and therefore was a commercial transaction, which was outside the purview of Sec.2(22)(e).
Jamuna Vernekar Vs THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26366 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Section 2(22)(e)
-
Default in making payment within the time stipulated would lead to revocation of the benefit of restoration of appeal and reconsideration of application under VsV scheme.
Latha Shivanna Vs The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26349 (HC-KARNATKATA)
-
The legislature has specifically expanded the meaning of the term land to include rights or interests in land as well, which was not done in Sec.50C.
V. S. Chandrashekar Vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26202 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Section 50C
-
Delayed payment of tax would not amount to its evasion as long as there has been a part-payment of tax and an acknowledgement that tax is due to be paid.
Confident Projects (India) Pvt. Ltd. & Others Vs DCIT
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26109 (HC-KARNATKATA)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.