Search
Advanced Search Search with field filters
/adv
Navigation
Home Go to homepage
/home
Direct Tax Income Tax resources
GST GST Acts, Rules & Case Laws
Company Law Companies Act & SEBI
Due Date Tracker Statutory compliance deadlines
/due
Due Date Calendar Calendar view of compliance deadlines
Daily Digest Today's tax updates and articles
/digest
Landmark Rulings

Direct Tax landmark rulings

15,829 rulings

  1. ITAT Surat · 28 May 2021
    When a non-resident agents operate outsides the country no part of his business arise in India, and payment is remitted directly abroad, and merely because an entry in the books of accounts was made, it does not mean that the non-resident had received any payment in India.

    Broach Textile Mills Ltd Vs The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28650 (ITAT-SURAT) · Section 195

  2. ITAT Bangalore · 22 Mar 2022
    As regards the rendering of services by the employees for payment of bonus/commission, the only requirement of Section 36(1)(ii) is that some services should have been rendered, which was established by Revenue itself.

    Sasken Technologies Limited Vs JCIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28649 (ITAT-BANGALORE)

  3. MP High Court · 22 Mar 2022
    The procedure laid down in Section 148A is required to be adhered to for reassessment notices issued on or after Apr 1, 2021.

    Yuvraj Vs INCOME TAX OFFICER

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28648 (HC-MP) · Section 148A

  4. Chhattisgarh High Court · 22 Mar 2022
    At the stage of issuance of notice for reopening of assessment, the Court is only to see whether there was prima facie material on the basis of which department could reopen the case and not the sufficiency or correctness of material to be considered.

    Bharat Krishi Kendra Vs Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28647 (HC-CHHATTISGARH) · Section 151(2)

  5. Bombay High Court · 21 Mar 2022
    Remuneration and interest from partnership firm cannot be treated as gross receipt.

    Perizad Zorabian Irani Vs Principal Commisioner of Income-Tax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28640 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 44AB

  6. Delhi High Court · 21 Mar 2022
    The Assessee had filed his replies to the notices that were not considered while passing the impugned order which in turn states that despite giving several opportunities the Assessee had not filed any reply/response.

    Mayur Batra Vs ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28639 (HC-DELHI)

  7. Allahabad High Court · 21 Mar 2022
    Mere signing of the notices cannot be equated with issuance of notice as contemplated under section 149 of the Act.

    Daujee Abhushan Bhandar Pvt. Ltd Vs Union Of India And 2 Others

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28638 (HC-ALLAHABAD) · Section 148

  8. Delhi High Court · 31 May 2021
    The assessee being a POA holder cannot be treated as rightful owner of the income, which has arisen on sale of a particular property.

    Bankimbhai D. Patel Vs ITO

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28631 (HC-DELHI)

  9. Delhi High Court · 31 May 2021
    As per provisions of Sec. 144B the Revenue was required to issue a show cause notice-cum-draft assessment order when there is a difference in the declared and assessed income.

    Lokesh Constructions P Ltd Vs THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28630 (HC-DELHI)

  10. Delhi High Court · 28 May 2021
    Had the show cause notice cum draft assessment been served on the petitioner, its authorised representative could have requested for a personal hearing in the matter.

    YCD Industries Vs NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28629 (HC-DELHI)

  11. ITAT Mumbai · 28 May 2021
    The income in question is treaty-protected inasmuch as it cannot be taxed in the hands of the assessee, in India, by virtue of Article 22(1) of the Indo Mauritius tax treaty.

    Morgan Stanley Mauritius Co Ltd Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28628 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  12. ITAT Mumbai · 28 May 2021
    The two partners have disclosed the share of their sale consideration as LTCG without any cost and if very same sale consideration is taxed in the hands of assessee, would only result in double taxation.

    Rajesh Pratap Ved Vs DCIT-13(3)(1)

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28627 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  13. ITAT Pune · 28 May 2021
    An income may be appropriately charged to tax on the regularisation of the operations of the bank coupled with the possibility of receipt of income in foreseeable future.

    TS-396-ITAT-2021PUN-Nutan_Warehousing_Co

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28626 (ITAT-PUNE)

  14. ITAT Pune · 27 May 2021
    Income from capital gain on a transaction which never materialized was, at best, hypothetical income.

    Amit Murlidhar Kamthe Vs ITO

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28625 (ITAT-PUNE)

  15. ITAT Mumbai · 28 May 2021
    Assessee though acquired certain intangible assets while acquiring business, the assessee did not claim it as deduction.

    Covestro India Private Limited Vs Asst. CIT CIR 1

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28624 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  16. Gujarat High Court · 28 May 2021
    Merely because while framing assessment for the subsequent year, the Assessing Officer noticed certain irregularity in the claim by itself would not be sufficient to satisfy requirements of the proviso to Section 147.

    Gujarat Ambuja Exports Ltd Vs THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28623 (HC-GUJARAT) · Sections 148, 80IA

  17. Delhi High Court · 26 May 2021
    Revenue is directed to grant a personal hearing through video conferencing.

    Blue Square Infrastructure Llp Vs NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28622 (HC-DELHI)

  18. ITAT Mumbai · 19 Mar 2022
    The CIT(A) recorded a finding based on evidence that money was transferred to HSBC Geneva out of the income earned in Abu Dhabi and savings made over the years since 1976 and thus appeal is dismissed.

    Ganpat Singhvi Vs DCIT(IT)

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28621 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  19. ITAT Delhi · 19 Mar 2022
    Consideration for accessing database of the Assessee cannot be considered as royalty under Article 12 of the India-US DTAA.

    OVID Technologies Inc. Vs The Dy. C.I.T.

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28620 (ITAT-DELHI)

  20. ITAT Kolkata · 19 Mar 2022
    The addition of Rs.10 lacs was unwarranted and revenue is directed to delete the same.

    Sandeep Modi Vs Deputy Commissioner of Incometax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28619 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · Section 10(10D)

Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.


An unhandled error has occurred. Reload ×

Rejoining the server...

Rejoin failed... trying again in seconds.

Failed to rejoin.
Please retry or reload the page.

The session has been paused by the server.

Failed to resume the session.
Please retry or reload the page.