-
SC - The expression “due” only means that a refund becomes due if there is an order under the Act which either reduces or waives tax or interest. It is of no matter that the interest that is waived is discretionary in nature. Claim of interest allowed.
M/s. K. Lakshmanya And Company Versus Commissioner of Income Tax & Another
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13796 (SC) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=70299&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
SC - When the collection is illegal, there is corresponding obligation on the revenue to refund such amount with interest in as much as they have retained and enjoyed the money deposited.
The Director of Income Tax (International Taxation) Versus M/s Set Satellite (Singapore) Pte. Ltd.
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13795 (SC) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=70300&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
SC - Assessment in the hands of non-existing amalgamating company is void and not curable u/s 292B
Spice Enfotainment Vs. CIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13792 (SC) · Section. 292B
-
Low Tax Effect Circular: The CBDT cannot issue any circular having retrospective operation. Consequently, instruction/circular issued on 9.2.2011 directing withdrawal of low tax effect appeals applies only to appeals filed after that date and not to pending appeals. The fact that the CBDT itself vide Circular dated 10.12.2015 directed that the instruction to withdraw low tax effect appeals will apply retrospectively to pending appeals has no bearing
CIT. vs. Gemini Distilleries
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13751 (SC)
-
S. 44BB: Amounts received as “mobilisation fee” on account of provision of services and facilities in connection with the extraction etc. of mineral oil in India attracts s. 44BB and have to be assessed as business profits. S. 44BB has to be read in conjunction with ss. 5 and 9 of the Act. Ss. 5 and 9 cannot be read in isolation. The argument that the mobilisation fee is “reimbursement of expenses” and so not assessable as income is not acceptable because it is a fixed amount paid which may be less or more than the expenses incurred. Incurring of expenses, therefore, would be immaterial. Also, the contract was indivisible
Sedco Forex International Inc vs. CIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13750 (SC) · Section. 44BB
-
SC - Amount received by the non-resident company towards mobilization/demobilisation fees for oil rigs is taxable u/s. 44BB.
SEDCO FOREX INTERNATIONAL INC. Vs COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13736 (SC)
-
SC - CBDT instruction 3/2011 laying down monetary appeal filing limits for Revenue’s appeals is not retrospective in operation.
Gemini Distilleries Vs. The CIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13729 (SC)
-
Permanent Establishment (PE) under Article 5 of DTAA: Entire law on concept of “fixed place of business”, “service PE” and “agency PE” explained. The fact that there is close association and dependence between the US company and the Indian companies is irrelevant. The functions performed, assets used and risk assumed, is not a proper and appropriate test to determine whether there is a location PE
ADIT. vs. E-Funds IT Solution Inc.
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13728 (SC)
-
Entire law on the valuation of immovable properties under the 'rent capitalisation' method versus the 'land and building' method explained in the context of s. 7(2) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. Also, law on taking the view in favour of the assessee if two reasonable constructions of a statute are possible explained
Bimal Kishore Paliwal vs. CWT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13727 (SC)
-
S. 2(22)(e): Any payment by a closely-held company by way of advance or loan to a concern in which a substantial shareholder is a member holding a substantial interest is deemed to be “dividend” on the presumption that the loans or advances would ultimately be made available to the shareholders of the company giving the loan or advance. However, the legal fiction in s. 2(22)(e) does not extend to, or broaden the concept of, a “shareholder”
CIT. vs. Madhur Housing And Development Co.
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13726 (SC) · Section. 2(22)(e)
-
SC - The Indian company only renders support services which enable the assessees in turn to render services to their clients abroad. This outsourcing of work to India would not give rise to a fixed place PE. Also, MAP agreement for earlier year cannot be considered as precedent for subsequent years.
E-Funds IT Solution Inc. ACIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13709 (SC)
-
SC - If two reasonable constructions of taxing statute are possible, that construction which favours the assessee must be adopted. The above proposition cannot be read to mean that under two methods of valuation if the value which is favourable to assessee should be adopted.
Bimal Kishore Paliwal and Ors. Vs. Commissioner Of Wealth Tax
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13699 (SC)
-
S. 80-IA contains substantive and procedural provisions for computation of special deduction. Any device adopted to reduce or inflate the profits of eligible business has to be rejected. The claim for 100% deduction, without taking into consideration depreciation, is anathema to the scheme u/s 80-IA of the Act which is linked to profits. If the contention of the assessees is accepted, it would allow them to inflate the profits linked incentives provided u/s 80-IA of the Act which cannot be permitted
Plastiblends India Limited vs. ACIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13698 (SC) · Section. 80-IA
-
SC - Assessee should mandatorily consider depreciation deduction while computing incentive deduction u/s. 80-IA. Mahendra Mills ruling cannot be applied while interpreting Section 80-IA of the Act.
Plasticbends India Ltd. Vs. Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13681 (SC)
-
S. 153A search assessment: Supreme Court stays operation of the judgement of the Delhi High Court in Dayawanti Gupta vs. CIT 390 ITR 496 (Del). The High Court dealt with the issue whether an assessment u/s 153A can be made even if no incriminating material has been found during s. 132 search proceedings
Dayawanti vs. CIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13678 (SC) · Section. 153A
-
S. 2(47)/ 45: Entire law on whether a joint development agreement entered into by an owner of land with a developer constitutes a "transfer" u/s 2(47) and whether the same gives rise to capital gains chargeable to tax u/s 45 and 48 of the Income-tax Act explained in the context of the provisions of the Transfer of Property Act, Registration Act and real income theory
CIT. vs. Balbir Singh Maini
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 13671 (SC) · Sections. 2(47), 45
-
SC - JDA - There can be no capital gains addition in the hands of members of co-operative societies without registration of Joint Development Agreement between the co-operative societies and developers.
CIT. vs. Balbir Singh Maini
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13667 (SC)
-
SC - SLP Dismissed - Trust can be registered u/s 12A/12AA even though there is no formal deed.
Tsurphu Labrang vs. CIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13633 (SC) · Sections.12A, 12AA
-
S. 45(5): Enhanced compensation and interest thereon under an interim order passed by the High Court in pending appeals relating to land acquisition matter are liable to be assessed for income tax in the year in which it has been received
CIT. vs. Chet Ram (HUF)
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13629 (SC) · Section. 45(5)
-
S. 132: The plea that the search proceedings initiated u/s 132 are invalid and that the block assessment proceedings are without jurisdiction cannot be entertained because s. 132A provides that the 'reason to believe' or 'reason to suspect', as the case may be, shall not be disclosed to any person or any authority or the Appellate Tribunal as recorded by Income Tax Authority u/s 132 or 132A
M/s N. K. Jewellers vs. CIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13628 (SC) · Section. 132
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.