Direct Tax landmark rulings

1. Karnataka High Court · 25 Apr 2016
   HC - Merely because the creditor could not be traced on the date when the verification was made, same is not a ground to conclude that there was cessation of the liability. No Sec 41(1) addition.

   CIT vs Alvares and Thomas

   (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10142 (HC-KARNATAKA) · Section 41(1)

2. Supreme Court · 23 Apr 2016
   SC - No exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiab) to Visvesvaraya Technological University as it doesn’t satisfy the condition of being an institution ‘wholly or substantially financed by the Govt.’

   Visvesvaraya Technological University vs. ACIT

   (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10141 (SC) · Section 10(23C)

3. Supreme Court · 22 Apr 2016
   SC - SLP dismissed - Wheeling charges neither neither qualify as rent (u/s 194I) nor as FTS (u/s 194J) and thus no TDS required to be withheld.

   CIT(TDS) vs. Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution

   (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10140 (SC)

4. Madras High Court · 22 Apr 2016
   HC - Waiver of 'principal' loan amount by bank is taxable perquisite of beneficiary assessee u/s 28(iv).

   CIT. vs. Ramaniyam Homes P. Ltd.

   (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10139 (HC-MADRAS) · Section. 28(iv)

5. ITAT Mumbai · 22 Apr 2016
   ITAT - All taxes have been paid by British gas and second time TDS cannot be deducted on same amount.

   DCIT. vs. Mahanagar Gas Ltd.

   (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10138 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

6. ITAT Mumbai · 22 Apr 2016
   ITAT - Revision of order u/s 263 cannot be done if two views are possible on the issue. There is no money borrowed or debt incurred as such provisions of sec. 2(28A) and sec. 194A do not apply.

   Neo Sports Broadcast Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (TDS)

   (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10137 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section. 194A

7. ITAT Mumbai · 22 Apr 2016
   ITAT - TDS u/s 194C and not u/s 194J is applicable to subscription payments made to TV channels for redistribution of TV Channels through cable operators.

   ITO. vs. Wire & Wireless (India) Limited

   (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10136 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Sections. 194C, 194J

8. ITAT Delhi · 22 Apr 2016
   ITAT - Explanation given by assessee that it was under a genuine belief that it was entitled for relief u/s 80 IA (supported by CA-certificate) is bonafide. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) deleted.

   Oxford Softech P. Ltd. vs. ITO

   (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10135 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section. 80IA

9. ITAT Jaipur · 22 Apr 2016
   S. 40(a)(ia), though inserted w.e.f. 01.04.2013, is retrospective in operation because it is curative and intended to remedy an unintended consequence. Accordingly, if the payee has paid the tax, the payer will not suffer a disallowance

   Rakesh Tak vs. ITO

   (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10134 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · Section 40(a)(ia)

10. ITAT Delhi · 22 Apr 2016
    S. 271(1)(c): Income-tax provisions are highly complicated and it is difficult for a layman to understand the same. Even seasoned tax professionals have difficulty in comprehending these provisions. Making a claim for deduction u/s S.80 IA which has numerous conditions is a complicated affair & cannot attract penalty

    Oxford Softech P. Ltd vs. ITO

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10133 (ITAT-DELHI)

11. ITAT Mumbai · 22 Apr 2016
    S. 40(a)(ia)/ 192: Employees deputed pursuant to a secondment agreement are not "employees" of the assessee and so the amounts paid by way of reimbursement of their salary is not subject to TDS in the assessee's hands

    DCIT vs. Mahanagar Gas Ltd

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10132 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 40(a)(ia), 192

12. Bombay High Court · 21 Apr 2016
    HC - Tribunal's order passed without dealing with its co-ordinate bench ruling makes the order a nonspeaking order and in breach of principles of natural justice.

    DSP Investment Private Limited vs. ACIT

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10131 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section. 14A

13. Bombay High Court · 20 Apr 2016
    Fundamental principles of accrual of income under mercantile system of accounting explained in the context of waiver of income recoverable from person facing financial difficulties

    CIT. vs. Neon Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10130 (HC-BOMBAY)

14. ITAT Chennai · 20 Apr 2016
    ITAT - Developer did not get building plan approved from competent authority, which is of utmost importance for implementation of JDA. Capital gains addition made on the basis of JDA entered by assessee to be deleted.

    Coromandel Cables Pvt Ltd. vs. ACIT

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10129 (ITAT-CHENNAI)

15. Bombay High Court · 20 Apr 2016
    Failure by ITAT to grant an adjournment requested due to bereavement results in breach of principles of natural justice

    Zuari Global Ltd. vs. Pr. CIT

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10128 (HC-BOMBAY)

16. Bombay High Court · 20 Apr 2016
    S. 14A/ Rule 8D: Non-consideration by the ITAT of a judgement of the co-ordinate Bench makes the order a non-speaking one and breaches the principles of natural justice

    DSP Investment Pvt. Ltd vs. ACIT

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10127 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 14A

17. Bombay High Court · 20 Apr 2016
    Mere non-introduction of interest-bearing funds is not sufficient to conclude that gains from sale of shares are not business income

    Pine Tree Finserve Pvt. Ltd vs. CIT

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10126 (HC-BOMBAY)

18. Supreme Court · 19 Apr 2016
    SC - SLP Dismissed - “Wheeling charges” was not taxable as FTS u/s 194J.

    CIT-TDS. vs. Delhi Transco Ltd.

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10125 (SC) · Section. 194J

19. Supreme Court · 19 Apr 2016
    SC - SLP Dismissed - Surrender of Floor Area Ratio relating to land in favour of developer for construction of flats is transfer u/s 2(47).

    Dinesh Rankha vs. CIT

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10124 (SC)

20. Supreme Court · 18 Apr 2016
    Important law on concept of "ancestral property" under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 and the formation of a HUF by the surviving members of the deceased explained

    Uttam vs. Saubhag Singh

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10123 (SC)

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