-
Merely because dispute involved some family members and such dispute is ultimately settled by filing consent terms, the same cannot be styled as a family arrangement or family settlement and on such basis, it cannot be held that the consideration received as a result of such settlement, does not constitute capital gain.
P. P. Mahatme Vs THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26385 (SC)
-
There is no mechanism to enable to collect STT beyond client code.
NATIONAL STOCK EXCHANGE Vs Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax-7
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26336 (SC)
-
Scope of post search assessment should be limited to incriminating evidence found during search only.
SKS ISPAT AND POWER LTD. Vs COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL IV MUMBAI
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26335 (SC) · Section 153A
-
Assessee is entitled to avail of the unabsorbed depreciation beyond the period of 8 years, prescribed under the pre-amendment Section 32.
Central Electronics Ltd. Vs PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI 2
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26334 (SC)
-
Counsel for Revenue was unable to dispute the legal proposition laid down in the aforementioned ruling, and accordingly, dismissed the appeal.
Jindal Aluminium Ltd Vs THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIT (A) & ANR.
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26333 (SC) · Section 80-IA
-
Taxability of sums received for supply of software as "royalty": Given the definition of royalties contained in Article 12 of the DTAAs, the amounts paid by resident Indian end-users/ distributors to non-resident computer software manufacturers/suppliers, as consideration for the resale/use of the computer software through EULAs/distribution agreements is not the payment of royalty for the use of copyright in the computer software and that the same does not give rise to any income taxable in India, as a result of which the persons referred to in section 195 of the Income Tax Act were not liable to deduct any TDS under section 195 of the Income Tax Act. The provisions contained in the Income Tax Act (section 9(1)(vi), along with explanations 2 and 4 thereof), which deal with royalty, not being more beneficial to the assessees, have no application in the facts of these cases
Engineering Analysis Centre Of Excellence Private Limited vs. CIT
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26307 (SC)
-
What is of importance is that once a DTAA applies, the provisions of the Income Tax Act can only apply to the extent that they are more beneficial to the assessee and not otherwise.
Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence Private Limited Vs THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR.
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26281 (SC)
-
Although in Vijaya Bank, provisions of Sec. 18 applied, the ratio propounded therein continues to hold good.
The Bank of Rajasthan Ltd Vs COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26256 (SC)
-
In view of the second proviso to Section 153A of the said Act, once assessment got abated the assessee as well as revenue to make claims for allowance or to make disallowance.
Jsw Steel Ltd Vs PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26255 (SC) · Sections 153A, 139
-
Considering the fact that for the previous year, certain benefit was conferred by way of notification dated 08.05.2020, in our view, it would be appropriate for the petitioner to approach the CBDT.
Gaurav Baid Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26177 (SC)
-
Once section 80P(4) is out of harm’s way, all the assessees in the present case are entitled to the benefit of the deduction contained in section 80P(2)(a)(I).
THE MAVILAYI SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD. & ORS. Vs COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26026 (SC) · Section 80P
-
The assessee is entitled to deduction to the extent provision made in the accounts subject to limit mentioned in Section 36(1)(viia) of the Act.
BANK OF BARODA Vs THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX & ORS.
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26017 (SC) · Section 36(1)(viia)
-
Merely because the investment was considerably large and as noted, several corporate structures were either created or came into play in routing the investment in the assessee through P5AHIML would not be sufficient to brand the transaction as colourable device.
PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 14 Vs M/S. ADITYA BIRLA TELECOM LTD
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26016 (SC) · Section 68
-
Since the nature of the assessee’s business itself is to receive deposits, Sec. 269SS was inapplicable.
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs M/S SAHARA INDIA FINANCIAL CORP. LTD.
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26015 (SC) · Section 269SS
-
Reopening of assessment beyond 4 years is permitted only if income escapes assessment by way of failure on the part of assessee to disclose all material facts.
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL III) & ANR. Vs BPTP LIMITED
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26014 (SC)
-
The giving of loans by a primary agricultural credit society to non-members is not illegal.
THE MAVILAYI SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD. & ORS.
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 24992 (SC) · 80P
-
When the main judgment of the High Court cannot be effected in any manner, no relief can be granted by this Court in the special leave petition filed against order rejecting review application to review the main judgment of the High Court.
T.K. DAVID Vs KURUPPAMPADY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. & ORS.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24931 (SC)
-
The observation made by ITAT on the doctrine of merger would not hold good.
GANGADHAR NARSINGDAS AGRAWAL (HUF) Vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24859 (SC)
-
All appointments prior to Feb 12, 2020 would be governed by the parent statutes and rules while the Tribunal Rules 2020 with the modifications suggested by SC would apply to all appointments made after Feb 12, 2020.
MADRAS BAR ASSOCIATION Vs UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24844 (SC)
-
Assessees have miserably failed to establish the capacity of the source and the genuineness of the transaction.
SADIQ SHEIKH Vs THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24825 (SC) · Section 68
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.