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

16,018 rulings

  1. ITAT Cochin · 18 Apr 2016
    S. 80-IB(7): Amounts by way of rent and other misc items, though shown as "other income" in the books, constitutes "key revenue category" as per ICAI Guidelines and are "derived" from the business of the hotel

    Kumarakom Lake Resort Pvt. Ltd vs. ACIT

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10122 (ITAT-COCHIN) · Section 80-IB(7)

  2. AAR · 18 Apr 2016
    AAR - Provision of coring services under a sub-contract, taxable at concessional rate u/s 44BB.

    Corpro Systems Limited UK

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10121 (AAR) · Section. 44BB

  3. Madras High Court · 19 Apr 2016
    HC - Payment to Tamil Nadu Industrial Development Corporation Limited for executing 99 years land lease deed is not rent. No TDS u/s 194I.

    TRIL Inforpark Limited vs. ITO

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10120 (HC-MADRAS) · Section. 194I

  4. Bombay High Court · 18 Apr 2016
    HC - Since conduct of petitioner not being forthcoming, this is not a fit case to exercise extraordinary writ jurisdiction in foreign asset reassesment case.

    Soignee R. Kothari vs. DCIT

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10119 (HC-BOMBAY)

  5. ITAT Mumbai · 15 Apr 2016
    Transfer Pricing Of Corporate Guarantees: Explanation i(c) to S. 92 B, though stated to be clarificatory and stated to be effective from 01.04.2002, has to be necessarily treated as effective from at best AY 2013-14 as it is an "anti abuse" provision. Dept’s submission that Bharti Airtel 161 TTJ 428 is “per incuriam” is not acceptable. Law laid down in Micro Ink 176 TTJ 8 (Ahd) on transfer pricing implications of corporate guarantees reiterated

    Siro Clinpharm Private Limited vs. DCIT

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10118 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 92B

  6. ITAT Mumbai · 15 Apr 2016
    Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules which regulates the admission of additional evidence by the CIT(A) cannot override the principles of natural justice

    Avan Gidwani vs. ACIT

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10117 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  7. ITAT Mumbai · 15 Apr 2016
    ITAT - Confirmation of demand raised under section 201, cannot be the sole criteria for imposing penalty under section 271C.

    Aishwarya Rai Bachchan vs. ACIT

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10116 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Sctions. 201, 271C

  8. ITAT Kolkata · 15 Apr 2016
    ITAT - Depreciation at the rate of 60% prescribed for “computers including computer software” on ATM machines.

    The Royal Bank of Scotland N.V vs. DDIT

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10115 (ITAT-KOLKATA)

  9. Bombay High Court · 15 Apr 2016
    HC - Letting out premises by trust to educational institute for rent is in consonance with object of “advancement of education”. First proviso to Sec. 2(15) is inapplicable.

    DIT(Exemptions) vs. Lala Lajpatrai Memorial Trust

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10114 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section. 2(15)

  10. ITAT Agra · 15 Apr 2016
    S. 147/ 148: Law laid down in Jet Airways India 331 ITR 236 and Ranbaxy 336 ITR 136 that if AO does not make any addition for the reason stated for reopening, he cannot add any other income holds good even for years when Explanation 3 to s. 147 is operative

    Anugrah Varshney vs. ITO

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10113 (ITAT-AGRA) · Sections 147, 148

  11. Bombay High Court · 15 Apr 2016
    S. 147: Though assessee claims that she is a non-resident & that onus is on the revenue to show that the money in the HSBC Geneva account is taxable in India, the non-cooperation with the Revenue by signing the consent waiver form shows that she has something to hide and makes it an unfit case for exercise of writ jurisdiction

    Soignee R. Kothari vs. DCIT

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10112 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 147

  12. ITAT Bangalore · 14 Apr 2016
    ITAT - Remedy against the order passed under Section 195(2) does not lie before the appellate authorities by filing the appeal for want of jurisdiction

    Bangalore International Airport Limited vs. ITO

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10111 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section. 195(2)

  13. ITAT Chandigarh · 14 Apr 2016
    ITAT - Compensation received during AY 1997-98 for termination of agreement to use trademarks is capital receipt.

    The ACIT. Vs. Smithkline Beecham Consumer Chan digarh Health Care, Ltd.

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10110 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)

  14. Madras High Court · 14 Apr 2016
    HC (SB) - There is no law, which says that a firm cannot be a partner in another firm.

    Megatrends Inc. vs. CIT

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10109 (HC-MADRAS)

  15. ITAT Mumbai · 13 Apr 2016
    ITAT - “Over- technical approach” of Revenue is untenable. Revenue can't deny the benefit of concessional rate of tax on the ground that assessee did not fill up the “special income” schedule in the tax return.

    Pramerica ASPF II Cyprus Holding Limited vs. DCIT

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10108 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  16. ITAT Mumbai · 13 Apr 2016
    ITAT - Claim of short term capital loss on assignment of loan advanced to its Indian subsidiary allowed. Assessee’s right to recover the sum advanced was not a capital asset u/s 2(14).

    Siemens Nixdorf Informationsysteme GmbH vs. DDIT

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10107 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 2(14)

  17. ITAT Ahmedabad · 13 Apr 2016
    ITAT - Revenue couldn’t unearth any evidence/tangible material against the assessee, either during the course of assessment/ appellate proceedings to show that assessee made any unexplained/undisclosed payment.

    Mahendrabhai B. Shrivastav vs. ITO

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10106 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)

  18. ITAT Mumbai · 13 Apr 2016
    S. 2(22)(d): Redemption of preference shares does not constitute "deemed dividend"

    Uday K. Pradhan vs. ITO

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10105 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 2(22)(d)

  19. ITAT Pune · 13 Apr 2016
    S. 14A/ Rule 8D: No disallowance can be made on shares held as stock-in-trade

    Paresh Pritamlal Mehta vs. ITO

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10104 (ITAT-PUNE) · Section 14A

  20. ITAT Mumbai · 13 Apr 2016
    S. 263: As issue of whether TDS should bee u/s 194C or 194H is subject to two views, revision is not possible

    Neo Sports Broadcast Pvt Ltd vs. CIT

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10103 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Sections 194C, 194H, 263

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.