-
The Supreme Court in ASSAM TEXT BOOK PRODUCTION AND PUBLICATION CORPORATION LTD. has interpreted the definition of an educational institution and it is evident that all State controlled educational committees / boards that have been constituted to implement the educational policy of the States have to be treated as educational institutions.
THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX EXEMPTIONS, BANGALORE., THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTIONS) CIRCLE – 17 (1) BANGALORE. VERSUS KARNATAKA TEXT BOOK SOCIETY
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22537 (HC-KARNATKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82924&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
When the provisions contained in Sec. 40 (a) (iib) is clear in its terms that it will take in only fee or charges' enumerated therein or any fee or charge by whatever name called, it is clear that any levy of tax is outside the ambit and scope of the said provision.
Kerala State Beverages(Manufactoring And Marketing)Corporation Limited Vs ACIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22536 (HC-KERALA) · Section 40(a)(iib)
-
While exercising plenary powers bestowed under Article 142 of the Constitution to do complete justice, the court should bear in mind the legislative intent and should not render the provision otiose.
Assistant Commissioner (CT) Vs M/s. Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Health Care Limited
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22535 (SC)
-
The requirement under Sec.68 is that the assessee would be required to explain the source of credit in the books of accounts but not the source of the source i.e. source of the creditor.
Kesharwani Sheetalaya Sahsaon Allahabad Vs Commissioner of Income Tax
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22534 (HC-ALLAHABAD) · Section 68
-
The obligation to deduct Tax at Source under Section 194E of the Act is not affected by the DTAA and in case the exigibility to tax is disputed by the assesse on whose account the deduction is made, the benefit of DTAA can be pleaded and if the case is made out, the amount in question will always be refunded with interest.
PILCOM Vs C.I.T. WEST BENGAL-VII
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22533 (SC) · Section 194E
-
If the return itself is under probe and scrutiny, such return cannot be the foundation to sustain a claim for refund till such scrutiny is not complete.
VODAFONE IDEA LTD. Vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22532 (SC) · Section 143(1D)
-
Assessee in his averments has made out a clear case that there was sufficient cause which being beyond the control of the assessee, prevented him from filing the appeals in time before the Tribunal. The assessee was diligent and has sought advice from his counsel from time to time and was not guilty of negligence on his part and it cannot be said that the delay was due to the negligence and inaction on the part of the assessee, which could have been avoided by the assessee if he had exercised due care and attention.
SHRI LAXMAN NAINANI M/S NAINANI MEDICO VERSUS THE DCIT, CENTRAL CRICLE-3, JAIPUR.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22531 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83339&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Where there is no basis for levy of interest u/s 234D and such levy is ultimately held to be not valid in the present case, the amount paid by the assessee will go to offset the outstanding tax and interest demand except interest u/s 234D and only on the remaining outstanding demand, the interest u/s 220(2) shall be levied.
M/S RAMA HANDICRAFTS VERSUS DCIT, CIRCLE-04 JAIPUR
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22530 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83340&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Clause (i) to section 201(3) of the Act specifies that no order shall be made under sub-section (1) of section 203 of the Act deeming a period to be an assessee in default for failure to deduct the whole or any part of the tax from a resident in India, at any time after the expiry of two years from the end of the financial year in which the statement is filed in a case where the statement referred to in section 200 has been filed. Here, the assessee has not deducted TDS under section 194H of the Act and thus, the question of filing of quarterly statement as required under section 200 of the Act by the assessee do not arise and therefore, we held that the assessee is not covered by the provisions of section 201(3)(i) of the Act.
THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE – 3, CHENNAI. VERSUS M/S. VODAFONE SOUTH LTD., (NOW KNOWN AS VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD.) AND (VICE-VERSA)
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22529 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83345&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
If there is income element in the documents seized form the possession of the assessee, then there was no requirement of bringing any corroborative material on record. However, there has to be existence of income in the documents seized. If the documents seized does not show any income earned by the assessee, then ld AO cannot rest on provision of section 292C without bringing any corroborative material on record.
SUMMIT MITTAL, MADHUR MITTAL VERSUS DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-22, NEW DELHI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22528 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83346&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
In the impugned communications dated 14.12.2015 and 28.11.2016, the respondent has not denied that the petitioner had truly and fully disclosed all the materials that were required for completing the assessments.e assessment.
M/S. INTERNATIONAL FLAVOURS AND FRAGRANCES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, LARGE TAXPAYER UNIT – II
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22527 (HC-MADRAS) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82919&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
From the reading of letter dated 01.01.2011 of the said MD IN Services Private Limited UK, the non-resident overseas company indicates that the service provided by them to the petitioner was in the nature of consultancy services. Payments made by the petitioner to the said UK company would be an income deemed to accrue/arise in India within the meaning of Section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
M/S. SHRIRAM CAPITAL LIMITED VERSUS THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) , CHENNAI AND THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION – I (2) , CHENNAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22526 (HC-MADRAS) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82920&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
To qualify as a business loss it is necessary that such loss should have been incurred during the year, since the unit was sold and closed since long back. The loss does not qualify even otherwise as allowable business loss during the year as assessee did not prove that such loss has been incurred during the year.
National Research Development Corporation Vs DCIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22525 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
Action u/s 263 of the act is initiated for the issues which are already decided in the original assessment u/s 143 (3) of the act and not in reopened assessment. Therefore in such circumstances, if Ld. PCIT wants to touch any issue of the original assessment order, the time limit for passing the order us/ 263 of the act should run from the date of the original order passed u/s 143(3) of the act and not the subsequently reopened assessment order u/s 147 of the act.
Jindal Steel & Power Ltd Vs Pr. CIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22524 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 263
-
The coronavirus should be considered a case of natural calamity and Force majeure clause maybe invoked, wherever considered appropriate, following the due procedure, also cites SC orders dated March 23rd and May 6th extending limitation period for filing appeals.
Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Vs JSW Limited
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22523 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
The AO overstepped his jurisdiction and commented on the third party assessee which is not permissible under the Act.
Glebe Trading Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22522 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
When the assessee no more remains the owner of the equipment, how can it claim depreciation on the same. Under these circumstances depreciation cannot be postponed beyond the actual life/ ownership of the equipment of 3 years, which is also fortified by TRAI notification wherein the life of the STBs has been taken at 3 years and allows depreciation @ 60%.
M/s Fastway Transmission (P) Ltd. Vs The ACIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22521 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH) · Section 37
-
Only the rental income should be charged to tax under income from house property and the income from maintenance services should be brought to tax under income from other sources after allowing benefit of deduction towards expenditure incurred on maintenance charges.
Jagatjit Industries Ltd Vs Dy. CIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22520 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
It is not possible on the part of the Addl.CIT to go through the orders in about more than 100 cases on the very same day and give approval. Even if such approval has been given, it can be said that the same is nothing but a technical formality without application of mind.
Uttarakhand Uthan Samiti Vs ITO
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22519 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 153A
-
At present, there is no necessity to go into the merits of the captioned stay application.
Smt. Sangeeta Sawhney Vs ACIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22518 (ITAT-DELHI)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.