-
Revenue, while giving effect to ITAT order cannot go into the question as to whether the expenditure is capital or revenue.
Altair Engineering India Pvt. Ltd Vs The DCIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29381 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 154
-
In the present case provisions of Sec. 56(2)(viib) would not be applicable since assessee has not charged premium and shares were issued at face value.
Ozone India Ltd Vs DCIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29380 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · Section 56(2)(viib)
-
Non-obstante clause would not exclude the operation of Sec. 153 as a whole since it implies that irrespective of availability of larger time to conclude the proceedings, final orders are to be passed within one month in line with the scheme of the Act.
Roca Bathroom Products Private Limited Vs The Commissioner of Income Tax
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29379 (HC-MADRAS) · Sections 144C, 153, 153(2A), 153(3)
-
The contents of the FIR has to be accepted as true at this stage and the Court cannot inquire into the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made therein, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out from the contents thereof.
H.D.F.C. Bank Vs The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29378 (HC-PATNA) · Section 132(3)
-
The Assessees cannot take shelter under the opinion given by the expert since none of the Assessees showed to have made any risk analysis before making their investment in a penny stock.
Swati Bajaj and Others Vs PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29371 (HC-CALCUTTA)
-
The term 'process' used under Explanation 2 to Section 9(1)(vi) in the definition of 'royalty' does not imply any 'process' which is publicly available but is an item of intellectual property.
Madura Coats Pvt Ltd Vs The DCIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29370 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
-
Merely because of the fact that initial advance has been made by the assessee as loan, the entire transaction cannot be considered as genuine transaction, wherein the value of the shares has gone down by 3733% i.e. Rs.5.6 crores became Rs.15 lakhs within a span of 7 days.
O3 Capital Global Advisory Pvt. Ltd Vs DCIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29369 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
-
Section 10(23C)(v) does not prescribe any stipulation, which makes the registration under Section 12AA as a condition precedent for availing the exemption.
The Nanded Sikhgurudwara Sachkhand Hazur Apchalnagar Sahib Vs ACIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29364 (ITAT-PUNE) · Section 10(23C)(v)
-
The application for rectification of the order passed by ITAT amounts to review of its own order passed by the ITAT, which is not permissible.
Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd Vs The ACIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29357 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
TDS is not payable on payments made to agencies like HUDA on behalf of the State Government in light of clarification provided by Directorate of Town and Country Planning, Haryana and thus, penalty under Section 271C was deleted.
Satya Developers Pvt. Ltd Vs Joint Commissioner of Income Tax
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29356 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 271C
-
Issue on which rectification application is preferred by the Assessee is a debatable issue which could not be considered.
Periyasamy Pillai Educational Trust Vs The Income Tax Officer
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29355 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Section 154
-
There should be no impediment to the appellate Tribunal to consider the petitioners’ grounds even as regards the Rate.
Palmer Investment Group Limited Vs THE DEPUTY COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29354 (HC-KARNATAKA)
-
Simply because the subsidy has been disbursed in the form of refund of VAT and CST, it will not alter the purpose of granting the subsidy, which is nothing but establishment of new industrial units in less developed areas of the State.
Haldex India Pvt. Ltd Vs DCIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29353 (ITAT-PUNE)
-
The bandwidth charges reimbursed by the Assessee is not in the nature of royalty and thus not liable for deduction of tax at source.
Cerner Healthcare Solutions India Private Ltd Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29352 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
-
IGST was a balance sheet item and not a claim made in the profit and loss account, which by no stretch of imagination could be termed as ‘income chargeable to tax having escaped assessment’ and thus, the notice issued under Section 148 was patently illegal.
Schneider Electric India Pvt. Ltd Vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29351 (HC-DELHI)
-
The CIT(A) explained that if such transactions were to be treated as transfer by notionally assigning a value, then the benefit of indexation and Section 54 to be given to the Assessee and thus CIT(A)’s order is upheld.
Sanika Avadhoot Vs Income Tax Officer
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29350 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Assessee, registered as primary agricultural credit society, was entitled for the benefit of deduction under Section 80P(2).
Irula Snake Catchers Industrial Co-operative Society Limited Vs Income Tax Officer
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29349 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
-
Danish Tax Council: As per Article 5(4) of tax treaty between the countries, the work performed by assessee’s employee could be categorised as 'marketing', covered under sub-clause (e) of the Art.5(4) which provides for exception for PE constitution, if the same is of preparatory or auxiliary in nature.
XYZ Co. Vs Foreign Court Denmark
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29342 (FOREIGN)
-
Though catena of judgments have been cited by the ld. counsel and how they are applicable on the facts of the case, the same are not being discussed because the case is being decided on the facts and material brought on record and the findings of the ld. CIT(A).
Arizona Ventures Pvt. Ltd Vs ITO
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29341 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 68
-
Sitting fees is the part and parcel of remuneration of the Director and hence has an element of salary for which taxes should be deducted.
HLS Asia Ltd Vs DCIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29340 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 194J
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.