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

15,867 rulings

  1. ITAT Ahmedabad · 18 Oct 2019
    Once the AO has accepted the interest cost as part of the project then the same treatment needs to be given even to the interest income by adjusting the same against the part of the project cost as the interest expense and income are inextricably linked.

    Adani mining Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20283 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · Section 56

  2. ITAT Ahmedabad · 17 Oct 2019
    Quasi-judicial authorities are being respected not on account of their power to legalize injustice on technicalities, rather on account of their power to remove such injustice.

    Rudra Construction Vs DCIT

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20282 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)

  3. ITAT Delhi · 17 Oct 2019
    The payment was towards publicity expenses which enabled the assessee to find a sponsor to share the ground and no income deemed to accrue or arise in India in terms of Sec.5(2) r.w. Sec.9, also since payee is resident of UAE and does not have PE in India, tax cannot be deductible.

    DLF Limited Vs ITO

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20281 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 195

  4. ITAT Chandigarh · 17 Oct 2019
    CIT(A) had relied on Jurisdictional HC decision in IL & FS Energy Development Company, wherein it was held that CBDT circular 05/2014 cannot override the provisions of section 14A. CIT(A) bound to follow the said decisions as against the CBDT Circular which is an internal guideline and not the law as laid down by the Courts.

    Hycron Electronics Vs The Income Tax Officer

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20280 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)

  5. ITAT Bangalore · 16 Oct 2019
    Since the assessee had already claimed exemption towards the cost of assets as application of income in the year of acquisition, allowing exemption towards repayment of loan (taken for acquiring the said assets) would result in double exemption for the same amount.

    Medical Relief Society of South Kanara Vs The Income-tax Officer (Exemptions)

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20279 (ITAT-BANGALORE)

  6. ITAT Delhi · 18 Oct 2019
    Assessing Officer cannot circumscribe himself to a particular section and put blinkers when he during the course of assessment proceedings find that it is taxable under different section. His power to examine the issue encompasses under different sections also including u/s 68.

    Prime Comfort Products P Ltd Vs ACIT

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20278 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 68

  7. Bombay High Court · 16 Oct 2019
    It is of importance that the legislature has used the phrase 'considered and decided' in the past tense. The phrase 'considered and decided' cannot be read as pending consideration in appeal or revision. To do so would be adding and changing the plain language of the statute.

    Piramal Investment Opportunities Fund Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-21(2)

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20277 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 154

  8. Bombay High Court · 16 Oct 2019
    BCCI is allowed to directly make the tax payment in the account of the IT Department on behalf of the assessee, issues mandamus granting extension of 180 days for making payment.

    Goa Cricket Association Vs Principle Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20276 (HC-BOMBAY)

  9. ITAT Cuttack · 18 Oct 2019
    Assessee could not substantiate its claim before the AO, therefore, the AO treated the commission receipt as income of the assessee from salary. CIT(A) relying on the decision of Kanwaljit Singh upheld the action of AO. Before us, the assessee produced ledger account of staff salaries, meeting expenses ledger account, business promotion expenses ledger account, rent and electricity charges ledger account etc.

    SHRI JALENDRA SAHOO VERSUS ITO, WARD-2 (3) , BHUBANESWAR

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20275 (ITAT-CUTTACK) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=78530&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  10. ITAT Delhi · 18 Oct 2019
    Identical issues had come up before the Tribunal in the case of sister RWA of the assessee, namely, Belaire Condominium Association the interest expenditure has been incurred wholly and exclusively for earning such interest income on Bank deposit. As per the Apartment buyers agreement there is an obligation on every buyer to make security deposit and there is corresponding obligation on the society to pay interest on such deposit.

    BELVEDERE TOWER CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION VERSUS ITO, WARD-1 (3) , GURUGRAM.

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20274 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=78535&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  11. ITAT Jaipur · 18 Oct 2019
    It is a clear case of complete lack of enquiry on the part of the AO which renders the assessment order erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. We note that in the Sale Deed the description of the plot of land has been given with residential plot number situated in a newly developed residential colony, namely, Shanti Nath Nagar-II, Ajmer road, Kekri.

    SHRI SHEETAL KATARIA S/O SHRI MOHAN LAL KATARIA VERSUS THE PRINCIPAL CIT, AJMER.

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20273 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=78536&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  12. ITAT Jaipur · 18 Oct 2019
    In the case in hand, since the revenue was allowed to take the necessary steps, therefore, the delay in filing the Memorandum of Appeal against the legal heir of the deceased assessee has been found to be explained by the revenue due to inadvertent mistake and, therefore, even if the said revised form no. 36 is filed belatedly, the Tribunal is satisfied with the reasons and cause of delay explained by the ld. D/R.

    INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 (1) , KOTA. VERSUS LATE SHRI CHANDI RAM THROUGH L/H SMT. SARLA DEVI

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20272 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=78537&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  13. ITAT Delhi · 18 Oct 2019
    When the bank has issued bank guarantee on behalf of the assessee there is no principal agent relationship between the bank and the assessee which is a mandatory condition for invoking the provisions contained u/s 194H and in these circumstances, the assessee was not liable to deduct tax at source u/s 194H from payment of bank guarantee commission to the bank.

    M/S. NAVNIRMAN HIGHWAY PROJECT PVT. LTD. VERSUS DCIT, CIRCLE 18 (1) , NEW DELHI.

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20271 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=78543&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  14. ITAT Pune · 18 Oct 2019
    There is no dispute on the fact that the assessee did not record any expenditure on this issue in its books for the financial year relevant to the assessment year 2007-08 and accordingly no deduction was claimed in the preceding year on this score. It was only on the mutual settlement arrived at between the assessee and Kinetic Engineering Ltd. that the assessee depicted the amount of ₹ 124.53 lakh as expenditure and claimed deduction during the year.

    KLASSIC WHEELS PVT. LTD., MR. SUNIT MUNOT, M/S. SUMESH INDUSTRIES, VERSUS DCIT, AHMEDNAGAR CIRCLE, AHMEDNAGAR

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20270 (ITAT-PUNE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=78548&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  15. ITAT Mumbai · 17 Oct 2019
    It is well-settled that the cardinal rule of interpretation is that the statute must be construed according to its plain language and neither should anything be added nor subtracted therefrom unless there are adequate grounds to justify the inference that the Legislature clearly so intended.

    L & T Hochtief Seabird Joint Venture Vs Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20269 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 40(ba)

  16. Bombay High Court · 17 Oct 2019
    No appeal under the Act from the impugned order is available to the Petitioner, however on detailed perusal of Sec. 264. A revision would lie to the Commissioner of Income Tax from any order passed by the authority subordinate to him in respect of any proceeding under the Act.

    Aditya Marine Limited Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax(International Taxation) and others.

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20268 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 264

  17. Delhi High Court · 17 Oct 2019
    CIT (A) has set aside the penalty imposed upon the respondent assessee u/s 271(1)(c) while observing that the AO had not been able to establish either any concealment of material fact, or furnishing of inaccurate particulars by the assessee and the Tribunal has affirmed the said finding of the CIT (A).

    PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VERSUS PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20267 (HC-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=80193&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip

  18. ITAT Ahmedabad · 17 Oct 2019
    We are of the considered view that it would be reasonable and justifiable if average rate were applied for valuation of closing stock. We find that rate of opening stock was at ₹ 19.15 per kg. whereas closing stock was at ₹ 9.49 per kg. The average realization value is at ₹ 17.75 per kg. therefore, it would meet end of justice if average of 19.15+9.49+ 17.15= 46.14/3 = 15.83 per kg. may be adopted for valuation of closing stock as on 31.03.2010.

    M/S. KAMAL OIL INDUSTRIES VERSUS JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, RANGE PATAN, MEHSANA

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20266 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=78488&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  19. ITAT Bangalore · 16 Oct 2019
    Outstanding demand arising out of issues already decided in favour of the assessee by the Tribunal in the earlier AYs cannot be recovered.

    Volvo Group India Pvt Ltd Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20265 (ITAT-BANGALORE)

  20. Supreme Court · 16 Oct 2019
    This information is not something new to the AO. There is nothing in the reasons recorded by the AO to suggest that, such investment is bogus. AO's requirement of verifying the genuineness of the investor and of further investigation would fall within the realm of fishing enquiries, which is wholly impermissible in law in the context of reopening of the assessment.

    NuPower Renewables Pvt Ltd Vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax 1(2)(2) & Ors.

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20264 (SC)

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.