-
The legislature has specifically expanded the meaning of the term land to include rights or interests in land as well, which was not done in Sec.50C.
V. S. Chandrashekar Vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26202 (HC-KARNATAKA) · Section 50C
-
Reliance placed on such uncorroborated and untested statement of Shri. Nilesh Bharani while making the additions to the income of the petitioner is highly questionable, that too, when for the previous assessment year he retracted the statement.
Dilipkumar P.Chheda Vs IncomeTaxOfficer-4(1), Thane & Ors.
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26201 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
Where the TDS statements have been filed after 01.6.2015 and processing thereof happens and intimation issued thereafter, the Assessing officer is well within his jurisdiction to levy fees under section 234E of the Act.
Special Judge Court SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Cases) Vs ITO
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26200 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · Section 234E
-
Forfeiture of the convertible warrant had resulted in extinguishment of the right of the assessee, thus constituted transfer u/s 2(47) and allowed the STCL claim.
Azalea Infrastructure Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26193 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
The income on sale of shares has to be regarded as LTCG.
United Spirits Limited Vs The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26192 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
-
Up to AY 2019-20, compensation received for termination of any agreement cannot be taxed u/s.28(ii)(e) of the Act.
Sai Mirra Innopharm Private Limited Vs The Income Tax Officer
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26185 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Section 28(va)(a)
-
Option money received by the assessee is capital receipt which requires an adjustment only at the time of transfer of the shares by Dabur to CUIH while working out resultant capital gain.
Dabur Invest Corp Vs The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26184 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
Considering the fact that for the previous year, certain benefit was conferred by way of notification dated 08.05.2020, in our view, it would be appropriate for the petitioner to approach the CBDT.
Gaurav Baid Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26177 (SC)
-
The actual group cost is allocated to respective countries benefited to these services in proportion to the revenue in that country and are incurred outside India.
Expeditors International of Washington Inc Vs DCIT
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26176 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
Deduction cannot be denied to the assessee in view of the Explanation 1 inserted to section 35(1)(ii) by Finance Act, 2006 with retrospective effect from April 01, 2006.
MRC Transolutions Pvt. Ltd Vs ACIT
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26175 (ITAT-PUNE)
-
Once compensation is exempt from tax by virtue of Section 96, then any enhanced compensation or interest payable on such enhanced compensation cannot be brought to tax as interest income, which is taxable u/s.56(2)(viii) of the IT Act.
SV Global Mill Ltd Vs The ACIT
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26168 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
-
LOI is only a right to possess plot of land and not land itself and therefore the provisions of section 50C are inapplicable to the present case.
Raminder Singh Vs The ITO
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26167 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH) · Section 50C
-
The services under MSA were not in relation the enjoyment of the right / property for which royalty was received by assessee and thus was not covered under Article 13(4)(a)/(b) of India-UK DTAA.
Aircom International Ltd Vs CIT
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26162 (AAR)
-
The actual rendering of the basic engineering design service as well as offshore advisory services was done not directly by the Applicant from France but by its PO in India.
Technip France SAS Vs CIT
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26155 (AAR)
-
The exercise of power by the Tribunal is not to be in accordance with Section 254(2A) of the Act the Tribunal has no such power to issue directions, but has got power to grant an interim order under Section 254, subject to the conditions stipulated therein.
M. Kiran Kumar Vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26154 (HC-MADRAS) · Section 254
-
Even though the ld. CIT was rightfully entitled to take recourse to the Explanation 2.,t is palpable that none of the four clauses of the Explanation 2 applies to the case under consideration. The sequitur is that the revisionary power, even under the enlarged scope of the Explanation 2, was not legally exercisable.
Nalco Company,USA Nalco Water India limited Vs CIT
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26141 (ITAT-PUNE)
-
It cannot be the case of the Revenue that only the specific portion on ICD was not considered by the assessing officer as assessment order contained other disallowances after considering assessee’s response.
Eicher Motors Ltd Vs THE CIT
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26140 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
After taxing the income from application of funds, the AO cannot turn his back and claim that the expenditure on borrowing is not allowable as business expense income from investments has been offered to tax and the same has been taxed as business income, there is no justification for disallowance of so-called proportionate interest.
Reliance Infrastructure Ltd Vs DCIT
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26139 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
U/s 2(47)(vi), transfer of capital asset includes transferring or enabling the enjoyment of any immovable property by way of becoming a member of or acquiring a share in a company or by way of any agreement or arrangement or in any other manner whatsoever.
Shri Shailendra Bhandari Vs ACIT
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26132 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Where the matter had been remanded to be re-done, it would hardly make a difference as to whether the remand had been to the TPO or the DRP, thus indicating that the provisions of Section 144C were also governed by the limitation of time set out in Section 153 of the Act.
Roca Bathroom Products Private Limited Vs CIT, The DCIT
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26125 (HC-MADRAS) · Section 153
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.