-
S. 68 Bogus Purchases: Despite admission by the assessee that the purchases were mere accommodation entries, the entire expenditure cannot be disallowed. Only the profit embedded in the purchases covered by the bogus bills can be taxed. The GP rate disclosed by the assessee cannot be disturbed in the absence of incriminating material to discard the book results
PCIT vs. Paramshakti Distributors Pvt. Ltd
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19758 (SC) · Section 68
-
S. 170/ 292BB: A notice issued in the name of the amalgamating entity after amalgamation is void because the amalgamating entity ceases to exist. Participation in the proceedings by the assessee cannot operate as an estoppel against law. This is a substantive illegality and not a procedural violation of the nature adverted to in s. 292BB. There is a value which the court must abide by in promoting the interest of certainty in tax litigation. Not doing so will only result in uncertainty and displacement of settled expectations. There is a significant value which must attach to observing the requirement of consistency and certainty. Individual affairs are conducted and business decisions are made in the expectation of consistency, uniformity and certainty. To detract from those principles is neither expedient nor desirable.
PCIT vs. Maruti Suzuki India Limited
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19757 (SC) · Sections 170, 292BB
-
The issuance of jurisdictional notice and the assessment order thereafter passed in the name of non-existing company is a substantive illegality and not a procedural violation of the nature adverted to in Section 292B.
Pr. CIT vs. Maruti Suzuki India Limited
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19738 (SC)
-
Once the action is held in accordance with law and especially in tax matters, the question of invoking powers under Article 142 of the Constitution does not arise.
Prashanti Medical Services &Research Foundation Vs Union of India & Ors.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19737 (SC) · Section 35AC
-
HC ought not to have interfered with ITAT's order as no substantial question of law arose therefrom. SC thus allowed assessee's appeal and set aside the HC order and reinstated ITAT order.
PURSHOTTAM KHATRI Vs COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19728 (SC)
-
Once arm's length principle has been satisfied, there can be no further profit attributable to a person even if it has a PE in India.
Honda Motors Co. Ltd Vs ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19727 (SC)
-
Four years timeframe for completion of project, by no standards, can be said to be unreasonable, harsh, absurd or incapable of compliance.
Global Estates Vs COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19719 (SC) · Section 80IB(10)
-
S. 4: The primary liability and onus is on the Dept to prove that a certain receipt is liable to be taxed. Deposits collected by a finance company are capital receipts and not revenue receipts. The fact that the deposits are credited to the profit and loss account is irrelevant. The true nature of the receipts have to be seen and not the entry in the books of account (All imp judgements referred).
The Peerless General Finance And Investment Co Ltd vs. CIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19710 (SC) · Section 4
-
S. 80IB(10)(a): There shall be stay of judgement in Global Reality 379 ITR 107 (MP) where it was held that issuance of completion certificate, after the cut off date by the Local Authority but, mentioning the date of completion of project before the cut off date, does not fulfill the condition specified in clause (a) of Section 80IB (10) read with Explanation (ii) thereunder
Global Estates vs. CIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19708 (SC) · Section 80IB(10)(a)
-
The new and amended method of accounting for NPAs was declared and notified in clear words. We therefore do not see any reason and ground to interfere with the finding on absence of failure to disclose full and true material facts.
PUNJAB AND SIND BANK Vs PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 7
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19692 (SC)
-
It is true that there was no direct focus of the Court on whether subscriptions so received are capital or revenue in nature, we may still advert to the fact that this Court has also, on general principles, held that such subscriptions would be capital receipts, and if they were treated to be income, this would violate the Companies Act.
THE PEERLESS GEN. FIN AND INVESTMENT COMPANY LIMITED VERSUS COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19674 (SC) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79207&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The proper remedy of the petitioner-assessee would be to raise all pleas before the AO in assessment proceedings and if it is decided against him then to carry the issue further in appeal to CIT (Appeals) and then to the Tribunal in second appeal and then to the High Court under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, if the occasion so arises in appeal.
MURLIBHAI FATANDAS SAWLANI VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19673 (SC) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79208&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
A pronouncement by this Court, even if it cannot be strictly called the ratio decidendi of the judgment, would certainly be binding on the High Court.
The Peerless Gen.Fin And Investment Company Limited Vs Commnr. Of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19651 (SC)
-
Explanation 5A below Section 271 of the Act would apply only in case of searched person and cannot be extended to the person other than the searched person.
RAJKUMAR GULAB BADGUJAR Vs PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19638 (SC) · Section 271(1)(c)
-
Taxability of ESOP-shares settlement.
Vernan Trust Vs PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 23
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19622 (SC)
-
Since the amendment is prospective in nature, therefore Revenue's contention that amendment in Sec.149 is retrospective as its procedural in nature is rejected.
BRAHM DATT Vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ORS.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19614 (SC)
-
The assessment framed after a detailed scrutiny, could not be re-opened beyond 4 years.
DELOITTE HASKINS AND SELLS Vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19582 (SC)
-
Assessee’s SLP challenging 'Forum-shopping' indulgence is dismissed by SC. However, SC sets aside imposition of cost.
N.R. PORTFOLIO PVT. LTD Vs PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 6
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19581 (SC)
-
Speculation Loss: Law on when an amendment can be said to be clarificatory/ retrospective explained. The amendment to the Explanation to s. 73 by the Finance (No 2) Act 2014 with effect from 1 April 2015 is not clarificatory or retrospective. Consequently, loss occurred to the assessee as a result of its activity of trading in shares (a loss arising from the business of speculation) is not capable of being set off against the profits which it had earned against the business of futures and options since the latter did not constitute profits and gains of a speculative business
Snowtex Investment Limited vs. PCIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19512 (SC)
-
Entire law explained on (i) whether a litigant is bound by concessions of fact and law made by his Counsel/ Authorized representative during the hearing, (ii) tests to find out whether contract labourers are direct employees or not, (iii) meaning of "control and supervision", (iv) meaning of "master-servant" relationship & (v) when the findings in a judgement can be said to be "perverse" and such that no reasonable person could possibly arrive at
Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd vs. Mahendra Prasad Jakhmola
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19501 (SC)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.