-
Before the ITAT, both the Assessee and the Revenue preferred appeals and the entire penalty of Rs.29.02 lakh was an issue, thus, the subsequent reduction in penalty cannot oust the jurisdiction.
Late Shri Gyan Chand Jain through LR Vs Commissioner of Income Tax-I
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28905 (SC)
-
The profit derived from providing baggage screening services and aircraft handling services to other airlines as a participant of IATP pool would be covered under Article 8(1) read with Article 8(4) of India–USA DTAA.
United Airlines Vs DCIT, DDIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28904 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
Denial of tax benefit under Section 37 (1) cannot be construed as penalising the Assessee hospital and it only precludes it from claiming these nature of expense as a deductible expenditure.
Peerless Hospitex Hospital and Research Center Limited Vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Kolkata & Ors.
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28897 (HC-CALCUTTA)
-
Penal statutes which create offences or which have effect of increasing penalties in existing offences will only be prospective by reason of the constitutional restriction imposed by Article 20 of the Constitution.
Nexus Feeds Limited & Others Vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28896 (HC-AP)
-
Revenue failed to appreciate the Articles of the Verein which were relevant to understand the composition and operation of Verein for the benefit of the Members.
Deloitte Touche Tohmastu Vs Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28895 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
Immunity from penalty and prosecution can be denied only in the cases initiated on account of alleged misreporting of income.
Nirman Overseas Private Limited Vs NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28894 (HC-DELHI)
-
The provisions of section 56(2)(viib) or Rule 11UA are plain, clear and unambiguous and nowhere provide for rounding off to nearest rupee or multiple of ten or hundred.
Royal Accord Realtors Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28893 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Assessee is at liberty to challenge the assessment orders by availing remedy as provided under law and dismissal of the writ petitions would not come in the way for seeking remedy in accordance with law.
Malavika Enterprises Vs Central Board of Direct Taxes
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28886 (HC-MADRAS)
-
Since it is decided that the appeal was pending, based on the test of preponderance of probability, the decision taken by the respondents/revenue to reject Forms 1 & 2, filed by the petitioner/assessee, under the 2020 Act, cannot be sustained.
NALWA INVESTMENTS LIMITED Vs PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI 4 & ORS.
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28885 (HC-DELHI)
-
Sec. 26(7) is couched negatively for passing the order within one year from the end of the month of receipt of reference u/s 24(5) and thus, there is burden cast on the Adjudicating Authority to pass the order strictly within the period of limita
Advance Infradevelopers Pvt. Ltd. Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28884 (HC-MADRAS) · Section 26(7)
-
Sec 11(7), which restricts the availability of exemption u/s 10(34) to Charitable trusts, came into effect only from April 01, 2015, thus inapplicable to subject AY 2014-15.
Shekhar Bajaj Charitable Trust Vs Income Tax Officer-17(3)(3)
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28883 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 10(34)
-
Revenue is directed to pass fresh assessment order after taking into account Assessee’s objections, and also grants a personal hearing.
KBB Nuts Private Limited Vs NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE DELHI
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28882 (HC-DELHI)
-
ITAT’s dismissal order can be construed as passed in limine since it was based on preliminary assessment of facts, in the light of orders of preceding years with no discussion on merits of the case.
Bharat Bhushan Jindal Vs PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-12 & ANR.
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28881 (HC-DELHI)
-
AO is permitted to make addition of unexplained cash credits even though the income is estimated on sale.
Hirapanna Jewellers Vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28874 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM) · Section 68
-
The decision of one High Court is not a binding precedent on another High Court.
Deific Abode LLP Vs Union of India & Ors
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28873 (HC-CALCUTTA)
-
Once the windmills are installed before 31.03.2012, then rate of depreciation is applicable as per pre-amended. i.e. 80%.
Senthil Energy Pvt.Ltd Vs Income Tax Officer
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28872 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
-
Thrusting of percentage completion method upon by the Revenue is not sustainable.
Trident Estate Private Ltd Vs ITO-13( 3)( 4)
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28871 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 43CB
-
The ITSC could go beyond the scope of Sec. 245C and adjudicate additional income which is admittedly not disclosed in the application filed initially by the assessee.
Sri Krishna Tiles and Potteries (Madras) Pvt Ltd Vs The Income Tax Settlement Commission
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28870 (HC-MADRAS) · Section 245C
-
PCIT merely recorded 'yes, I am satisfied' and it cannot regarded as a valid satisfaction as it does not reflect due application of mind of the sanctioning authority before granting satisfaction.
Bharti Axa Life Insurance Company Ltd Vs ACIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28869 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 151
-
The petitioner has, according to us, at least at this stage, established a prima facie case in his favour concerning infraction of the principles of natural justice by the revenue.
PARVIN KUMAR BATTA Vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28868 (HC-DELHI) · Section 132(4)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.