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. ITAT Delhi · 22 May 2015
    ITAT - Where EOU’s were situated at separate location having independent buildings on separate addresses, their Plant & Machinery and fixed assets were also separate, cannot be treated as ‘single unit’ for section 10B deduction, merely on the basis that separate books of accounts were not maintained.

    DCIT. vs. NIIT Ltd.

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6677 (ITAT-DELHI)

  2. Delhi High Court · 22 May 2015
    HC - Even though dividend income derived from business promotion was assessable under head ‘income from other sources’ u/s 56, still interest expenditure incurred for the purpose of business promotion should be considered for business expenditure deduction u/s 36 (1) (iii) and not u/s 57.

    Eicher Goodearth vs. CIT

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6674 (HC-DELHI) · Sections. 36, 57

  3. Delhi High Court · 21 May 2015
    HC - Additional excise duty incurred on plastic moulds, given free of cost to contract manufacturers for manufacture of Tupperware products being 'tax-neutral', expense allowable u/s 37.

    Tupperware India Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6672 (HC-DELHI) · Section. 37

  4. ITAT Ahmedabad · 21 May 2015
    ITAT - When the fact of embezzlement is not accepted by the AO, there cannot be any occasion to make substantive assessment and protective assessment in respect of such an embezzlement income. “Protective addition” permissible only when income certainty established.

    ITO. Vs. Ketan B Thakkar

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6671 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)

  5. ITAT Delhi · 21 May 2015
    ITAT - Supply of sale of hardware and license of embedded software to end customers in India by a US company through its Indian subsidiaries is not royalty under Article 12 of India-US DTAA.

    Aspect Software Inc. vs. ADIT

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6670 (ITAT-DELHI)

  6. Karnataka High Court · 21 May 2015
    HC - Assembling of instruments and apparatus for measuring and detecting ionizing radiators is a manufacturing activity eligible for deduction u/s 10B

    Commissioner of Income-tax, Bangalore v. Saint Gobain Crystals & Detectors India (P.) Ltd.

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6654 (HC-KARNATAKA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=61160&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip

  7. Delhi High Court · 21 May 2015
    HC - Denying extension of stay by ITAT beyond 365 days to 'well-behaved' assessee is violative of Article 14 of Constitution and has no nexus or connection with object sought to be achieved.

    Pepsi Foods (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6653 (HC-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=61159&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip

  8. P&H High Court · 21 May 2015
    HC - Since there was no explanation by assessee for payment of commission to his son, daughter and daughter-in-law, moreover, there was no agreement between said parties, claim for deduction under section 36(1)(ii) was to be rejected. Similarly excessive rent paid to relatives in absence of explanation was to be rejected.

    Subhash Chander Malik v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle (I) Chandigarh

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6652 (HC-P&H) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=60804&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip

  9. ITAT Delhi · 21 May 2015
    ITAT - Since payment made to Tamil Nadu Sports Association was not covered under any of specific sections under Chapter XVIIB of Act, No TDS.

    International Merchandising Corporation v. ADIT, Circle 1(2) International Taxation, New Delhi

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6651 (ITAT-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenINTL.aspx?ID=7984&Category=INTLDecisions&CategoryType=Zip

  10. Bombay High Court · 21 May 2015
    HC - Interest received by assessee on R.B.I. securities after sale of same, as R.B.I. did not record change of ownership, such interest belonged to purchaser and not chargeable u/s 4 in assessee's hands

    ICICI Securities Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax-3(2), Mumbai

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6650 (HC-BOMBAY) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=57837&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip

  11. ITAT Mumbai · 21 May 2015
    ITAT - CIT(A) holding that assessee did not have PE in India as per DTAA without giving reasons, matter required readjudication

    ADIT (IT)-1 (2), Mumbai v. Co-operative Centrale Raiffeisen

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6647 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=40696&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  12. Madras High Court · 21 May 2015
    HC - Expenditure in cash in excess of Rs. 20,000 on costumes, makeup, wig material, travelling expenses etc., at different places of shooting was to be allowed as there was reasonableness in claim of assessee (actor)

    Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle II, Chennai v. R.S. Suriya

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6646 (HC-MADRAS) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=58513&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip

  13. Bombay High Court · 20 May 2015
    HC - Receipts on account of sale of pig iron, vessels, engineering products, materials and coke breeze, having no nexus with exports, hit by clause (baa) of the explanation to Section 80HHC, thus reduction of the same warranted from eligible profits.

    Sesa Goa Ltd. vs. CIT

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6645 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section. 80HHC

  14. ITAT Jabalpur · 20 May 2015
    ITAT - When overburden removal is carried out in the process of extraction of coal and the extraction of coal is not possible without doing so, such overburden expenses is required to be treated as revenue expenses

    Northern Coalfields Limited vs. ACIT

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6644 (ITAT-JABALPUR) · Sections. 35E, 37(1)

  15. Delhi High Court · 20 May 2015
    HC - DRP procedure is part of the assessment proceedings and queries raised and answered during the DRP proceedings stands on same footing as in the course of assessment proceedings before AO, therefore quashes reassessment proceedings u/s 148 is not justified.

    Lahyemer Holdings Gmbh vs DDIT

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6643 (HC-DELHI) · Section. 148

  16. Delhi High Court · 19 May 2015
    HC - The Third Proviso which restricts the power of the ITAT to grant stay beyond 365 days “even if the delay in disposing of the appeal is not attributable to the assessee” is arbitrary, unreasonable and discriminatory. It is struck down as violative of Article 14. The ITAT has the power to extend stay even beyond 365 days

    Pepsi Foods Pvt. Ltd vs. ACIT

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6642 (HC-DELHI) · Section 254(2A)

  17. Delhi High Court · 20 May 2015
    HC- Loss on sale of shares by assessee to JV partner at price lower than one offered in rights issue was not a 'colourable device' and transaction could not be said to be a cover up for de facto or real transaction

    Commissioner of Income-tax v. SIEL Ltd.

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6626 (HC-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenINTL.aspx?ID=7418&Category=INTLDecisions&CategoryType=Zip

  18. Supreme Court · 20 May 2015
    HC - As amendment made to provisions of section 40A(3) with effect from 1-4-1996 being substantive in nature could not be applied retrospectively

    M.G. Pictures (Madras) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Chennai

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6625 (SC) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=60754&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip

  19. Delhi High Court · 20 May 2015
    HC - Since assessee had amalgamated with transferee-company, assessment in name of amalgamating company was invalid (a nullity) as it ceased to exist after amalgamation.

    Commissioner of Income-tax (C)-II v. Micra India (P.) Ltd.

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6624 (HC-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=61143&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip

  20. ITAT Hyderabad · 20 May 2015
    ITAT - It was noted that some of comparables selected by TPO were providing high end KPO services whereas assessee was engaged in rendering low end BPO services and, thus, there existed functional difference, addition to assessee's ALP in respect of rendering ITES services to its ALP made by TPO is to be deleted.

    TNS India (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-2 (3), Hyderabad

    (2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6623 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=40499&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

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.