-
Funds which were not used for objects of the Trust, can be brought to tax under section 13(3) of the Act.
ACIT, CIR. 6 (1) , AHMEDABAD. VERSUS ARMEE INFOTECH AND (VICE-VERSA)
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28180 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=95053&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
As income generated out of earlier release of State Government for its project would have to be converted into State’s equity towards the project and the same cannot be counted as income of BMRCL.
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX BANGALORE, THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11 (2) BANGALORE VERSUS M/S BANGALORE METRO RAIL CORPORATION LTD.
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28179 (HC-KARNATKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=86362&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The guidance value of the land or the guidance value of the building would be appropriate mode to determine the full value of consideration in the case of a transfer where consideration for the transfer of a capital asset is not attributable or determinable.
THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1 (1) VERSUS M/S. CPC LOGISTICS LTD., (FORMERLY KNOWN AS CPC (INDIA) LTD.) , M/S. SHANKAR VITTAL MOTOR CO. LTD.
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28178 (HC-KARNATKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=86364&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The word 'may' in Section 144B(viii) should be read as 'must' or 'shall' and requirement of giving an assessee a reasonable opportunity of personal hearing is mandatory.
BHARAT ALUMINIUM COMPANY LTD. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28177 (HC-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=86367&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Explanations A(a)(ii) and A(b) to the Notifications dated 31 Mar, 2021 and 27 Apr, 2021, respectively, are ultra vires and therefore are null and void.
Manoj Jain Vs Union of India & Ors.
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28176 (HC-CALCUTTA)
-
It is settled law that where exercise of a power results in civil consequences to citizens, unless the statute specifically rules out the application of natural justice, the rules of natural justice would apply.
Bharat Aluminium Company Ltd Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28175 (HC-DELHI) · Section 144B(7)(viii)
-
No expenditure has been incurred for development of land, thus a non-agricultural land cannot be regarded as a trading asset without anything more.
M/s. Shalibhadra Developers Vs The ACIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28174 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
-
Once the entities are governed by the co-operative principles under the law in force and registered under state enactments, by implication or otherwise, shall only have the meaning of a Co-operative Society.
KARNATAKA STATE SOUHARDA FEDERAL CO-OPERATIVE LTD Vs THE PR. CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28173 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Sections 2(19), 80P
-
The CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the Revenue's action. Therefore, AO is directed to delete the addition.
Amal Allana Vs Income Tax Officer
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28172 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 23
-
Since the software product itself was not fully functional and there was no possibility of its sale, the expenses could not have been capitalized and treated as part of the fixed assets for claiming depreciation on the same.
iGNIS Technology Solutions Pvt. Ltd Vs The Income Tax Officer
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28171 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
-
CAM charges were in the nature of contractual payment made to a person for carrying out the work in lieu of a contract and thus, the same would clearly fall within the meaning of work as defined u/s 194C.
Connaught Plaza Restaurants P. Ltd Vs DCIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28170 (ITAT-DELHI) · Sections 194C, 194-I
-
The year 2021 was not leap year, thus, Assessee's 30 days period ended on Mar 18, 2021 to file objections which indeed was filed on Mar 16, 2021.
Marvell India Pvt Ltd Vs NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28169 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Section 144C(2)
-
Just because money is received through banking channels and the confirmations are on record, it did not establish the genuineness of the transaction.
Mishal Construction Pvt. Ltd Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28168 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 68
-
When the factual position and law is read conjointly, it appears that such capital receipts are not susceptible to tax u/s 115JB. The AO cannot bring such capital receipts to tax by including it in book profit artificially.
Ganeshsagar Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd Vs Income Tax Officer
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28167 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
-
Bad debts incurred by the assessee is certainly an expenditure allowable deduction u/s. 37 of the Act.
Ravi Advani Vs Income Tax Officer
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28166 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Section 263 does not permit PCIT to exercise revisionary jurisdiction on issues decided by CIT(A).
Dina Mahabir Re-Rollers Pvt Ltd Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28165 (ITAT-PATNA) · Section 144C
-
Revenue is directed to delete the disallowance of ESOP expenditure.
Aricent Technologies (Holdings)Limited Vs Addl. CIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28164 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 37(1)
-
The expenditure in question has to be regarded as revenue expenditure.
Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited Vs DCIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28163 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 37(1)
-
The disallowance should be restricted to Rs.9.88 Cr. i.e. to the extent to which information was not furnished.
HP India Sales Pvt. Ltd Vs JCIT (LTU)
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28162 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
-
The scope of Section 69 cannot be extended to bringing to tax investments of a non-resident entity in the hands of a resident individual, in the absence of material to support the inference of beneficial ownership.
Vilas Waman Katre Vs DCIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28161 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.