-
Revenue is direct to adopt the valuation of Rs 3,833/share computed on the basis of the fair market value of the net assets.
Sushiladevi R Somani Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30017 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
A Protocol to DTAA is its integral part and carries the same binding force as the MFN clause therein.
Koninklijke Philips N.V Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30011 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
-
Section 148A(d) order identifies the transaction specifically which was subject matter of SCNs.
Saroj Chandna Vs INCOME TAX OFFICER
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30010 (HC-DELHI)
-
Despite having a noble objective, Assessee could not be said to be a charitable trust eligible for registration under Section 12AA.
Dhan Housing and Habitat Development of Poor for Empowerment Confederation Vs CIT (Exemptions)
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30009 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
-
Assessee has not produced the receipts in case of donation of Rs.65.34 Lacs paid to Bharatiya Janata Party, but demonstrated the same through Assessee’s bank account.
Lodha Developers Ltd. Vs The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30008 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
There is no provision in the VSV Act prohibiting award of interest on delayed refund, the VSV Act does not authorise the respondent to either delay or withhold the payment of the refund.
Anjul Vs OFFICE OF PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-12, & ORS.
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30007 (HC-DELHI)
-
The Revenue provided less than 7 days to furnish the reply to show cause notice whereas Section 148A(b) provides that a period of not less than 7 days has to be provided.
Nidhi Bindal Vs INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 36(1), DELHI & ANR
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30006 (HC-DELHI) · Sections 148A(c)
-
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot be exercised on a issue which is already decided in appellate proceedings by CIT(A).
Greenwell Orchards Vs The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30005 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
-
From the combined reading of Section 245R(2)(i) and Section 153, it is clear that assessment order is not void even though payment made to UAE entity is assessed and disallowed.
Think and Learn Private Limited Vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 3
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30004 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
-
CIT(A) disregarded principle of natural justice in holding that relief can be claimed only by filing the revised return within the statutory time limit that had already expired.
Heidrick and Struggles Inc. Vs DCIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30003 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
HC ruling cannot be treated as precedent while keeping the question of law on CBDT’s powers under Section 119(2)(b) open for consideration in an appropriate case.
Vasudeva Adigas Fast Food Pvt. Ltd Vs Central Board of Direct Taxes & Others
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29996 (SC)
-
Section 56(2)(viib) is not applicable to the present case, since the same is only relevant for issuance of shares to residents.
Raw Pressery Private Limited (formerly known as Rakyan Beverages Pvt. Ltd.) Vs ACIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29995 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
CIT proceeded with an understanding that the profit attribution of a Fixed Place PE and Dependent Agent PE are in pari materia which has been specifically rejected in the binding judicial precedents stated above.
MFE Formwork Technology Sdn Bhd Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29988 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
There is a bonafide claim made by Assessee but under the wrong section and the said mistake is not a mistake which could only be corrected by filing a revising return.
Armine Hamied Khan Vs Income Tax Officer
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29987 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Sections 54, 54F
-
The modification is pursuant to the offer made by the Assessee and will not be considered as a precedent in any other proceeding.
Huawei Telecommunications (India) Company Private Limited Vs THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INV.)-4(3)
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29986 (HC-DELHI)
-
In the present case, proper verification was not done on the information available with the Revenue at the time of issuance of show cause notice under Section 148A(b) which lead to the erroneous order under Section 148A(d).
Excel Commodity And Derivative Pvt. Ltd Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29985 (HC-CALCUTTA) · Section 148A(d)
-
Amounts credited in favour of non-resident, were not at the disposal or control of statutory agent and therefore, cannot be charged to tax on the basis of receipt of income, actual or constructive in the taxable countries.
United India Insurance Co. Ltd Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29984 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Section 40(a)(i)
-
Deferred tax asset cannot be claimed as a deduction as revenue expenditure since it is not an actual expenditure.
Sunny Vista Realtors Pvt. Ltd Vs The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29971 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Depreciation cannot be denied merely on the reasoning that cars were registered in the name of the Directors of the Company.
Shivam Water Treaters Pvt. Ltd. Vs A.C.I.T.,(OSD)
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29964 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
-
ITAT erred in law by holding that the difference between the price at which stock options were offered to Assessee's employees under ESOP scheme and the prevailing market price of the stock on the date of grant of such options was not allowable revenue expenditure under Section 37(1).
PVR Ltd Vs COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29963 (HC-DELHI)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.