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

16,035 rulings

  1. Bombay High Court · 21 Aug 2015
    HC - Dept’s grievance that if amount is not credited to P&L A/c, accounts are not correctly prepared as per Schedule VI to the Companies Act, 1956 and adjustment to book profits can be made is not acceptable if auditors and ROC have not found fault with A/cs

    CIT vs. Forever Diamonds Pvt. Ltd

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 8529 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 115JB

  2. Bombay High Court · 21 Aug 2015
    HC - Interest on NPAs and Stick Loans, even if accrued as per the mercantile system of accounting, is not taxable as per prudential norms. Section 45Q of the RBI Act shall have overriding effect over the income recognition principle followed by cooperative banks. Assessing Officer has to follow the Reserve Bank of India directions 1998.

    CIT vs. Deogiri Nagari Sahakari Bank Ltd

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 8528 (HC-BOMBAY)

  3. ITAT Patna · 21 Aug 2015
    ITAT - Deductor’s liability qua TDS doesn’t get extinguished upon lapse of certain period of time. Limitation Act not applicable.

    The Muzaffarpur Central Co-operative Bank Ltd vs. ITO

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 8513 (ITAT-PATNA)

  4. AP High Court · 21 Aug 2015
    HC - Miscellaneous application filed by Revenue rejected being barred by limitation.

    The State Bank of India vs. CIT

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 8512 (HC-AP)

  5. ITAT Mumbai · 21 Aug 2015
    ITAT - Not correct to hold that the income pertaining to the TDS amount should be assessed in the reported PAN only, even when deductor misquoted assessee’s PAN. AO must tax the right person alone.

    Vikram Manibhai Mehta vs. ITO

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 8511 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  6. Supreme Court · 21 Aug 2015
    SC - HC, being Court of Record under Article 215, have the inherent power of review.

    CIT. vs. Meghalaya Steels Ltd.

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 8510 (SC)

  7. ITAT Mumbai · 21 Aug 2015
    ITAT - The profit and loss account should be read along with Notes of account should be applied uniformly in all kind of situations and hence due adjustment needs to be done for the effect of items disclosed in the Notes to accounts.

    Shivalik Venture Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 8509 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  8. Supreme Court · 20 Aug 2015
    SC - SLP Dismissed - Gujarat High Court had rejected AO’s invocation of Explanation 3 to Sec 43(1). Factum of respondent-assessee not having paid consideration for acquiring individual assets cannot be construed as illusory or colorable.

    CIT. vs. Sandvik Chokshi Ltd.

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 8508 (SC)

  9. ITAT Ahmedabad · 12 Jun 2015
    ITAT - Addition made on basis of witness statements, without giving assessee an opportunity to cross examine the witness and without collaborating other independent evidence is not sustainable in law.

    Shri Ashokkumar Bhailal vs. Income Tax Officer

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 8507 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)

  10. ITAT Mumbai · 10 Jun 2015
    ITAT - Merely because the addition was made as per the deeming provision of section 50C would not ipso facto lead to the conclusion that the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of income or concealed its income.

    Smt. Tarabai Kotumal vs. ACIT

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 8506 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section. 50C

  11. ITAT Kolkata · 10 Jun 2015
    ITAT - Wherever the assessee earned the interest-free income, the corresponding expenditure incurred in earning that income is to be disallowed u/s 14A. In the absence of any interest-free income, there cannot be any disallowance.

    ACIT. Vs. M/s Standard Vinimoy Pvt Ltd.

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 8505 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · Section 14A

  12. ITAT Kolkata · 10 Jun 2015
    ITAT - Explanation 4(a) to 271(1)(C) is not applicable as the addition made does not affect the loss declared in the return or converts the loss into income. Therefore, no penalty as taxable income and tax remains the same after adjusting the addition due to concealment.

    The W.B.State Co-Opt. Marketing Federation Ltd. vs. DCIT

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 8504 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · Section. 271(1)(C)

  13. ITAT Kolkata · 10 Jun 2015
    ITAT - Provisions of section 35D are applicable only to those expenditure, which cannot be regarded to be the revenue expenditure but since the fees paid to the Registrar of Companies has not been included under section 35D(2)(c)(iv), therefore, the assessee cannot get deduction for the same.

    M/s. Rohit Ferro Tech Limited vs. DCIT

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 8503 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · Section 35D

  14. ITAT Mumbai · 10 Jun 2015
    ITAT - No penalty is leviable where there is only a change of head of income.

    Dai Ichi Karkaria Ltd. vs. DCIT, Mumbai

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 8502 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section. 271(1)(C)

  15. ITAT Delhi · 08 Jul 2015
    ITAT - Payments made by the assessee company to Finland based as a consideration for review of design , construction and quality control plans from outside India are not in the nature of FTS.

    ITO (TDS) vs. Nokia India P. Ltd.

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 8501 (ITAT-DELHI)

  16. ITAT Delhi · 17 Jun 2015
    ITAT - Framing of assessment against a non existing entity/person is not a procedural irregularity but a jurisdictional defect and can not be cured by application of Section 292B.

    SC Jhonson Products Private Limited Vs. DCIT

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 8500 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section. 292B

  17. Supreme Court · 20 Aug 2015
    SC - SLP Dismissed - Gujarat HC had granted Sec 32AB deduction to assessee for utilizing amount withdrawn from investment deposit account towards term loans’ repayment.

    CIT. vs. Nirma Credit & Capital Ltd.

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 8499 (SC) · Section 32AB

  18. ITAT Chandigarh · 19 Aug 2015
    ITAT - Unlike reassessment proceedings u/s 147/148, CIT not required to issue any notice before assuming jurisdiction u/s 263. Opportunity of being heard was required before passing the order by CIT and not before commencing inquiry u/s 263.

    Vodafone South Limited vs. CIT (TDS)

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 8498 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH) · Sections. 194H, 263

  19. ITAT Kolkata · 11 Aug 2015
    ITAT - Withdrawal of deduction u/ 80IB in the subsequent years cannot be dealt in the proceedings u/s 154 as the same cannot be construed as a patent, glaring, obvious mistake apparent from record.

    Vinod Kumar Surana Vs. I.T.O Ward 56(2), Kolkata

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 8497 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · Sections. 80IB, 154

  20. ITAT Kolkata · 11 Aug 2015
    ITAT - The satisfaction of the Assessing Officer is the basis of invocation of the powers u/s 68 of the Act and the satisfaction must be derived from relevant factors on the basis of proper inquiry.

    Neeraj Murarka Vs. I.T.O Ward 35(2), Kolkata

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 8496 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · Section 68

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.