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

16,074 rulings

  1. Madras High Court · 12 Feb 2014
    HC upheld ITAT ruling that transactions were mere paper transactions and therefore, sham. Primary burden is on the assessee to establish that it has leased out the lanterns and only after their satisfactorily discharging the burden cast upon them, then only the burden will shift on the revenue. The transaction has been so made so as to make it appear as if genuine and from the statement given by the Managing Director of the assessee as well as the records which were produced clearly establish that they were totally lacking in genuinity, more so while the funds came back to the assessee even within less than one or two days. Hence lease agreements entered by the assessee with the six concerns are sham transactions and they are not entitled for a claim for depreciation.

    MARG Constructions Ltd. Vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3330 (HC-MADRAS)

  2. Delhi High Court · 18 Mar 2014
    Since the trust is eligible for exemption u/s 11, the additions made u/s 68 of the Act have to be examined on the yardstick applicable to donations received by a charitable trust.

    Director of income tax Vs. Charanjiv charitable trust

    (2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3329 (HC-DELHI)

  3. ITAT Mumbai · 16 May 2014
    Merely because the one of courses are not approved by the DG Shipping and were conducted by the assessee as private coaching classes or merely because there is huge surplus in the non-approved courses than the approved courses cannot be a ground for denial of exemption u/s.11 as long as the Trust is imparting education as per the objects of the Trust.

    ADIT(E) vs Samudra Institute of Maritime Studies Trust

    (2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3328 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  4. ITAT Mumbai · 19 Mar 2014
    S. 80IB - If the loss on fluctuation is to be treated as revenue loss then applying the same principle vice versa i.e. the income on account of foreign exchange fluctuation is also to be treated as taxable business income. Moreover the income from foreign exchange may be incidental to the business activity of the assessee but the same cannot be said to be derived from the manufacturing activity of the assessee.

    Asia Pacific Marbles Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO

    (2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3327 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  5. Gujarat High Court · 31 Mar 2014
    S. 147: Strict guidelines laid down to streamline procedure for reopening of assessments

    Sahkari Khand Udyog Mandal Ltd vs. ACIT

    (2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3326 (HC-GUJARAT)

  6. Karnataka High Court · 25 Mar 2014
    "Actual interest paid” – Interest paid on unpaid interest amount not deductable. If the interest is not actually paid, part of interest which has become part of the principal amount cannot be treated as amount borrowed.

    STATE OF KARNATAKA vs M/S WATERFALL ESTATE

    (2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3325 (HC-KARNATAKA)

  7. ITAT Panaji · 07 Feb 2014
    Once it is held that the assessee had set up the business during the year, the profit and loss account had to be prepared in accordance with Part II & III of Schedule VI of the Companies Act and has to be certified by the auditor.

    Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax vs South West Port Ltd

    (2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3324 (ITAT-PANAJI)

  8. ITAT Hyderabad · 28 May 2014
    Proceedings u/s. 153A of the Act always precede the proceedings u/s.153C of the Act and without recording satisfaction note by the AO initiating proceedings for completion of assessment u/s. 153A of the Act cannot be proceeded u/s. 153C of the Act in the case of such other person not searched.

    Shettys Pharmaceuticals & Biologicals Ltd vd DCIT

    (2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3323 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)

  9. ITAT Mumbai · 19 Feb 2014
    HC upheld ITAT order (2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3320 (ITAT-HYDERABAD), assessee was eligible for the benefit of deduction u/s 54F, though the assessee has not purchased the new residential house in the assessee’s own name as per the provisions of the said Section 54F of the Act.

    DCIT v. United Rubber Industries India Pvt. Ltd

    (2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3322 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  10. AP High Court · 28 Jan 2014
    HC upheld ITAT order (2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3320 (ITAT-HYDERABAD), assessee was eligible for the benefit of deduction u/s 54F, though the assessee has not purchased the new residential house in the assessee’s own name as per the provisions of the said Section 54F of the Act.

    Commissioner of Income Tax vs Sri S. Ramesh Goud

    (2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3321 (HC-AP)

  11. ITAT Hyderabad · 07 Sep 2012
    Assessee was eligible for the benefit of deduction u/s 54F, though the assessee has not purchased the new residential house in the assessee’s own name

    ACIT vs Sri S. Ramesh Goud

    (2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3320 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)

  12. AP High Court · 27 Mar 2014
    Grand’s Rule 6DD(j) benefit, even though S. 40A(3) applicable

    CIT vs Hyderabad Race Club

    (2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3319 (HC-AP)

  13. ITAT Panaji · 09 May 2014
    Mere no agriculture activity on land will not change the character of agricultural land. No evidence on the record that property in use is converted from agricultural land to non agricultural land prior to sale.

    ITO vs Shri Shaukat Karim Prasla

    (2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3318 (ITAT-PANAJI)

  14. Madras High Court · 04 Oct 2013
    “Meaning of owner of property” – Amendment of section 269UA w. e. f. 1-4-1988- Income from Business income or house property - The income receipt from letting out of the property was rightly assessed by the Assessing Officer as "income from house property".

    Rayala Corporation Pvt. Ltd vs ACIT

    (2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3317 (HC-MADRAS) · S. 22, 23, 28, 269UA

  15. AP High Court · 21 Feb 2014
    S. 10(1) - Hybrid seeds is a product of agricultural activity.

    Commissioner of Income Tax vs Prabhat Agri Biotech Limited

    (2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3316 (HC-AP)

  16. ITAT Mumbai · 21 May 2014
    Section 54F – Allotment date not relevant if Assessee made substantial payment for acquisition of new Flat

    ITO Vs. Saroja S. Mekal

    (2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3315 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 54F

  17. ITAT Agra · 29 May 2014
    2nd proviso to Section 40(a)(ia) is retrospective- No Disallowance for non deduction of TDS if recipient of income paid tax on the same

    Rajeev Kumar Agarwal Vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3314 (ITAT-AGRA)

  18. AAR · 02 May 2014
    MFN Clause in Double Taxation Avoidance Conventions – To be partial or not to be

    Steria (India) Limited

    (2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3313 (AAR)

  19. Calcutta High Court · 12 Mar 2014
    Share Broking Company can set off loss from speculation trade against gain from delivery trading

    CIT. Vs. Baljit Securities (P) Ltd.

    (2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3312 (HC-CALCUTTA)

  20. ITAT Hyderabad · 04 Apr 2014
    Capital gains not taxable on the basis of mere signing of development agreement

    Binjusaria Properties (P.) Ltd. Vs. ACIT

    (2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3311 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)

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.