-
HC - Assessee is liable for wealth-tax on the value of building which is let out to a bank.
South India Structural Corporation Ltd vs Dy CWT
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6051 (HC-MADRAS)
-
HC - Based on the conjectures and surmises, AO made comparison of the sale price and reduced the profit while computing deduction under section 10B, however if transaction with AE was not made for shifting profits to assessee, benefit of section 10B can not be denied.
Commissioner of Income-tax, Chennai v. Cauvery Stone Impex (P.) Ltd.
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6022 (HC-MADRAS) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=60339&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Assessee had been lackadaisical in its approach and had sought delay (1000+ days condonation request) in a nonchalant manner, thus parameters laid down by the Supreme Court when not to condone delay gets attracted to the facts of the present case.
P S Rajeswari Vs ACIT
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6020 (HC-MADRAS)
-
HC - Since S.127 was a machinery provision, CIT is having power of transfer even without assigning any reason.
CIT vs. Noorul Islam Educational Trust
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5955 (HC-MADRAS) · Section 127
-
HC - Amounts transferred by the assessee company to the General Reserve on amalgamation is not in the nature of any benefit or perquisite and thus not taxable under Section 28(iv).
Commissioner of Income Tax Versus M/s. STADS Ltd.
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5831 (HC-MADRAS) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=60688&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Assessee engaged the services of non-resident agent to procure export orders and paid commission. Services rendered can at best be called as a service for completion of the export commitment and would not fall within the definition of fees for technical services. Section 9 is not applicable. No TDS u/s 195.
Commissioner of Income Tax Versus M/s. Orient Express
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5829 (HC-MADRAS) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenINTL.aspx?ID=7967&Category=INTLDecisions&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Service tax on “temporary transfer or permitting the use or enjoyment” of, any copyright as defined in the Copyright Act, 1957 is justified.
AGS Entertainment Private Ltd. Vs. Union of India
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5712 (HC-MADRAS)
-
HC - Notification No.25/2012 dated 20.06.2012 is not arbitrary and discriminatory as it extends only to performing artistes in theatre and drama and not artistes in films. No Service Tax exemption to Film Actors.
Siddharth Suryanarayan Vs. Union of India
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5711 (HC-MADRAS)
-
HC - There is no specific notification or circular indicating that CPWD rate alone should be adopted in arriving at the cost of construction, the Tribunal is justified in adopting the valuation of the State P.W.D.
Commissioner of Income Tax Versus K. Jayakumar
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5707 (HC-MADRAS) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=60598&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Amount received by the appellant under the non-competition agreement is not in the nature of a salary and it is only a capital receipt as there is no relationship of employer and employee between the foreign company and appellant/assessee and this conclusion arrived at by the Tribunal is a misreading of the agreement.
Mr. G. Raveendran Versus The Commissioner of Income Tax
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5706 (HC-MADRAS) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=60599&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - There was no intention to acquire goodwill of the assessee and therefore, non-compete fee received by the assessee could not be treated as goodwill and it is not taxable as income. The reliance placed by the Assessing Officer on Section 55(2)(a) of the Income Tax Act was repelled by the Tribunal rightly on a plea that the said provision came into effect in the year 1998-99, whereas the assessment year in the present case is 1996-97
Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai Versus Hackbridge Hewittic & Easun Ltd.
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5705 (HC-MADRAS) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=60600&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Writ challenging partial stay of demand granted by AO u/s.220(6) is dismissed
Jyothy Laboratories Ltd. vs DCIT
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5701 (HC-MADRAS) · Section 220(6)
-
HC - Since carry forward losses had already been set off against other income of business, brought forward loss not to be reduced while computing sec. 80-IA relief
Commissioner of Income-tax, Coimbatore v. Eastman Exports Global Clothing (P.) Ltd.
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5634 (HC-MADRAS) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=59196&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Coercive recovery of 100% demand is set aside.
Panasonic India Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCIT
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5593 (HC-MADRAS)
-
HC - Death of Authorised representative not sufficient cause for delay of more than 558 days in Appeal Filing
Madhu Dadha vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Officer
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5562 (HC-MADRAS)
-
HC - Computation of period for purpose of levy of interest u/s 220(2) could not be adjudicated in a writ petition
Vaata Infra Ltd. v. Income-tax Officer, Company Ward-III (1), Chennai
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5541 (HC-MADRAS) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=58514&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Since Tribunal took time to dispose of petition of assessee, Rectification order passed by ITAT u/s 254 after 4 years was valid as it was well within time limit as specified under section 254(2).
Commissioner of Income-tax, Madurai v. Sree Ayyanar Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd.
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5514 (HC-MADRAS) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=58372&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Gifts received through cheques, which were drawn in the name of the individual later blended with the property of HUF by way of journal entry requires AO to analyse provisions of clubbing before making addition of gift in name of HUF
M.Veluswamy v. Income-tax Officer, Ward - I (1), Pollachi
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5478 (HC-MADRAS) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=58777&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - The assessee is a Non-Resident Indian and merely because there is a wrong description in the returns that he is a Resident, it would not alter the status of the assessee that he is a Non-Resident Indian for the assessment years
The Commissioner of Income-Tax, Trichy Versus Shri. N. Sundararaman
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5471 (HC-MADRAS) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=60453&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - As Tribunal had overlooked SC Ruling as to whether assessee was entitled to set-off of unabsorbed depreciation against gains from sale of depreciable asset, deemed as capital gains u/s 50, matter remanded back.
Southern Travels vs. ACIT
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5446 (HC-MADRAS) · Section. 50
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.