-
SC - Pending disposal of appeal, status-quo shall be maintained by the parties and to facilitate an early disposal - Dispose appeal preferably in 3 months.
Indus Towers Ltd. Vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27971 (SC)
-
SC - Amendment in Gratuity Act prospective - Enhanced ceiling under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (Gratuity Act) applies from May 24, 2010 and not from Jan 1, 2007.
Krishna Gopal Tiwary & Anr Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27261 (SC) · Section 10(10)
-
S. 254(2A) Stay by ITAT: Since the object of the 3rd proviso to s. 254(2A) is the automatic vacation of a stay that has been granted on the completion of 365 days, whether or not the assessee is responsible for the delay caused in hearing the appeal, such object being itself discriminatory, is liable to be struck down as violating Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Also, the said proviso would result in the automatic vacation of a stay upon the expiry of 365 days even if the Appellate Tribunal could not take up the appeal in time for no fault of the assessee. Further, vacation of stay in favour of the revenue would ensue even if the revenue is itself responsible for the delay in hearing the appeal. In this sense, the said proviso is also manifestly arbitrary being a provision which is capricious, irrational and disproportionate so far as the assessee is concerned. Consequently, the third proviso to s. 254(2A) will now be read without the word “even” and the words “is not” after the words “delay in disposing of the appeal”. Any order of stay shall stand vacated after the expiry of the period or periods mentioned in the Section only if the delay in disposing of the appeal is attributable to the assessee.
DCIT vs. Pepsi Foods Ltd
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26506 (SC) · Section 254(2A)
-
The contesting parties is directed to file written submission on or before March 26, 2021.
Sanfi Aventis Amerique Du Nord & Ors Vs THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26391 (SC)
-
Insertion of the expression even if the delay in disposing of the appeal is not attributable to the assessee violates Article 14 of the Constitution and ruled that where delay in disposing appeal is not attributable to the assessee, ITAT has power to grant extension of stay beyond 365 days in deserving cases.
Pepsi Foods Ltd Vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR.
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26389 (SC)
-
RoI filed before the due date u/s 139(1) is proper compliance under sub-rule (1A) of rule 5.
Jindal Steel Vs COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26388 (SC)
-
The language of Sec. 56(2)(viii) and 57(iv) are plain, unambiguous, and without scope of taking outside aid for interpretation.
Mahender Pal Narang Vs CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES MINISTRY OF FINANCE & ORS.
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26387 (SC)
-
Interest component will partake the character of amount due under Section 244A and interest computed after April 1, 1989 should be computed in accordance with Sec. 244A.
Syndicate Bank Vs THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR.
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26386 (SC)
-
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)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.