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

All landmark rulings

21,549 rulings

  1. Direct Tax ·Supreme Court · 07 Mar 2020
    S. 12AA: Registration can be applied for by a newly registered trust. There is no stipulation that the trust should have already been in existence and should have undertaken any activities before making the application for registration. The term ‘activities’ in s. 12AA includes ‘proposed activities’. The CIT must consider whether the objects of the Trust are genuinely charitable in nature and whether the activities which the Trust proposed to carry on are genuine in the sense that they are in line with the objects of the Trust. However, he cannot refuse registration on the ground that no activities are carried out

    M/s Ananda Social And Educational Trust vs. CIT

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21194 (SC) · Section 12AA

  2. Direct Tax ·ITAT Pune · 07 Mar 2020
    CIT(A) granted relief to the assessee appreciating the assessee‟s explanation relating to some glitches in the software. The said para of CIT(A)‟s order does not have reasons for accepting patent discrepancies appeared in the Profit and Loss Accounts and statement of accounts, dates in the audit reports, etc. No reason is given for the anti-dated Form No.10CCB.

    THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE – 3, PUNE VERSUS M/S. VISHRAM DEVELOPERS

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21193 (ITAT-PUNE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82241&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  3. Direct Tax ·ITAT Jaipur · 07 Mar 2020
    The information filed by the assessee as required by the AO is incompliance of the said letter/notice. Moreover, the AO has not given the finding about the genuineness of these documents filed by the assessee which means that the AO has not found any defect in the documents filed by the assessee. The assessee has clearly filed all the documents which include share application money, Resolution of share applicant companies whereby the directors were authorized to make investment in the shares of the assessee company, bank statements showing payment through banking channel and return of income filed by those companies.

    THE ITO WARD- 1 BEAWAR VERSUS M/S. SHEPHALI HOTELS & RESORTS PVT. LTD.

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21192 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82243&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  4. Direct Tax ·Karnataka High Court · 07 Mar 2020
    In the instant case, the assessee in support of identity, genuineness of transaction and credit worthiness of M/s Bhuwania Bros. Pvt. Ltd. had supplied a copy of the balance sheet and profit and loss account to the Assessing Officer. The appellant had also filed the copy of the return of income of M/s. Bhuwania Bros Pvt. Ltd. as well as copy of information letter.

    M/S. KUMAR NIRMAN AND NIVESH PVT. LTD. VERSUS THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX BANGALORE

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21191 (HC-KARNATAKA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82555&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip

  5. Direct Tax ·Bombay High Court · 07 Mar 2020
    Comparing the provision of Section 36(1)(vii), pre 1.4.1989 and post 1.4.1989, Supreme Court held that the position in law has become well settled. After 1.4.1989, it is not necessary for the assessee to establish that the debt in fact has become irrecoverable. It is enough if the bad debt is written off as irrecoverable in the accounts of the assessee. A claim of share broker assessee to deduction by way of bad debts under Section 36(1)(vii).

    PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -10 VERSUS HYBRID FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD (FORMERLY KNOWN AS MAFATLAL FINANCE CO LTD)

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21190 (HC-BOMBAY) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82558&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip

  6. Direct Tax ·Madras High Court · 07 Mar 2020
    There is no question of law arising for consideration as the appeal is devoid of merits. Liberty is given to the Department to proceed against the trustees and committee members dealing with administration and the monies of the temple for the mismanagement and misappropriation leading to loss of public monies and the Government revenue, if any.

    THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS) VERSUS M/S. ARULMIGU DEVI KARUMARIAMMAN THIRUKOIL

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21189 (HC-MADRAS) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82559&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip

  7. Direct Tax ·Bombay High Court · 07 Mar 2020
    In the Income Tax Act, 1922, Section 10(4) had banned allowance of any sum paid on account of 'any cess, rate or tax levied on the profits or gains of any business or profession '. In the corresponding Section 40(a)(ii) the expression “cess” is quite conspicuous by its absence. In fact, legislative history bears out that this expression was in fact to be found in the Income Tax Bill, 1961 which was introduced in the Parliament.

    SESA GOA LIMITED, VERSUS THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, RANGE 1, PANAJI GOA.

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21188 (HC-BOMBAY) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82562&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip

  8. Direct Tax ·Supreme Court · 06 Mar 2020
    Where the AO of the searched person and the other person is the same, there can be one satisfaction note prepared by the AO.

    M/S SUPER MALLS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21187 (SC)

  9. Direct Tax ·Supreme Court · 06 Mar 2020
    As priori, it must follow that the business is carried on by the enterprise owned by a company registered in India and the agreement entered into between the erstwhile partnership firm and the State Government, by legal implication, assumes the character of an agreement between the company registered in India and the State Government.

    Commissioner of Income Tax Vs M/s. Chetak Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21186 (SC) · Section 80IA

  10. Direct Tax ·ITAT Bangalore · 06 Mar 2020
    When there is no decision by the revenue for the earlier years, then there cannot be consistency for no-decisions.

    General Motors Overseas Corporation Vs Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation)

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21185 (ITAT-BANGALORE)

  11. Direct Tax ·ITAT Pune · 06 Mar 2020
    Pursuant to co-ordinate bench restoring the issue for fresh determination, AO straightaway passed the impugned order u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 254 directing to charge interest and penalty without first passing draft assessment order.

    AB Sandvik Coromant Vs ACIT

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21184 (ITAT-PUNE)

  12. Direct Tax ·ITAT Surat · 06 Mar 2020
    Since the terms and the purpose of HDFC Life is also akin to the purpose which is contained in keyman policy, therefore, any expenditure incurred by the company for making payment of insurance premium of key employees are allowable.

    SVS Tex O Fab Pvt Ltd Vs The Income Tax Officer

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21183 (ITAT-SURAT)

  13. Direct Tax ·ITAT Mumbai · 06 Mar 2020
    As the term forming part of participation had been used in context of a company which is resident of either of the Contracting State, and the term resident is a defined term, hence there was no requirement on the part of the A.O for reference to the domestic law.

    Sofina S.A. vs. The ACIT

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21182 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  14. Direct Tax ·ITAT Bangalore · 05 Mar 2020
    The contribution made for creation of cricket academy can be held to be in business interest and hence allowable u/s 37.

    Royal Challengers Sports Pvt.Ltd

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21181 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 37

  15. Direct Tax ·ITAT Mumbai · 05 Mar 2020
    If the proportion of the expenditure are in conformity with the maintenance charges collected from the licensee, then it cannot be considered as part of the rental income.

    YJ Reality and Aviation Pvt Ltd Vs The DCIT

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21180 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  16. Direct Tax ·ITAT Delhi · 06 Mar 2020
    Merely because the assessee categorised the claim under penalty levied on the assessee company for not complying to the terms of the contract, is not permissible to jump to the conclusion that such penalty was in respect of any offence or infraction of law committed by the assessee.

    Mahavir MultitradePvt. Ltd Vs Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21179 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 37(1)

  17. Direct Tax ·ITAT Delhi · 06 Mar 2020
    Assessee provided software development services, information technology enabled services and marketing support services to its associated enterprises on cost plus mark-up basis and availed of the management support services in the nature of legal, finance, human resource, information technology support and other support services from Avaya Singapore, thus companies functionally dissimilar with that of assessee need to be deselected from final list. Because of the absence of the profit motive and discharge of the social obligations, the Government companies stand on a different pedestal and are not good comparable to the entities like the assessee.

    AVAYA INDIA PVT. LTD. VERSUS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21178 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82214&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  18. Direct Tax ·ITAT Lucknow · 06 Mar 2020
    To decide this issue, it is important first to visit the statement of the director of the assessee which was recorded during the course of survey. We have particularly gone through the answer to question No. 35 wherein the director of the assessee has clearly stated that the figures noted in the diary represented sales unrecorded in the books of account and these figures related to the period April 2015 to August 2015.

    KANPUR ORGANICS PVT. LTD. VERSUS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21177 (ITAT-LUCKNOW) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82215&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  19. Direct Tax ·ITAT Visakhapatnam · 06 Mar 2020
    For a query from the bench both the parties have replied that the AO has not dropped the penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) before issue of show cause letter calling for explanation of assessee for levy of penalty u/s 271AAA. Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that the AO has applied his mind and initiated penalty u/s 271(1)(c) and conducted the proceedings u/s 271AAA.

    T. SAIMATHA, T. SATYANARAYANA VERSUS ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1 (1) VISAKHAPATNAM

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21176 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82223&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  20. Direct Tax ·Karnataka High Court · 06 Mar 2020
    All the expenses incurred for expansion of capital base of the company was directly related to the capital incidentally, that would help in profit making. When the object of the Assessee is to increase share capital, the expenses incurred in expanding share capital would be in capital field. In the instant case also the assessee with an object to increase share capital has incurred expenses in the form of payment of interest on account of delay in allotment of shares, yet the increase in capital results in expansion of the capital base of the company and may also help in profit making.

    THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE-2 (3), THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-11 (3) VERSUS GMR INDUSTRIES LTD

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21175 (HC-KARNATAKA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82553&Category=Judgment&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.