-
SC - No TDS u/s 194H on Prasar Bharati's commission payments to advertising agencies.
Prasar Bharati Vs Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20616 (SC) · Section 194H
-
ITAT - Interest earned from funds temporarily parked in FDRs out of borrowed funds is capital in nature since it is inextricably linked with the setting up of assessee's hotel.
Income-tax Officer Vs Triumph Realty Pvt. Ltd.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20611 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
ITAT - Property acquired by way of a perpetual lease constitutes 'purchase' for the purpose of exemption u/s 54F.
Shri N. Ramaswamy Vs The Income Tax Officer
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20610 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Section 54F
-
HC - Exemption u/s. 10(15)(f) on foreign currency loan - Even if the loan taken as working capital loan from M/s.Raghava Enterprises Limited earlier and employed by the assessee for such industrial development and the foreign currency loan in question was utilised to repay the loan to M/s.Raghava, the exemption given by the Ministry of Finance in favour of the Assessee cannot be said to have been lost by such facts.
Seven Seas Distillery (Pvt.) Ltd Vs Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20609 (HC-MADRAS) · Section 10(15)(f)
-
HC - Assessing Officer is not justified in reopening the assessment in the absence of failure on the part of the assessee to truly and fully disclose the material fact.
Scientific Publishing Services Pvt. Ltd Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20604 (HC-MADRAS) · Section 10B
-
ITAT - Amortisation of discount on issue of Euro bonds over the period of the Euro bonds allowed.
The Tata Power Co. Ltd Vs The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20603 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
ITAT - The English translated version of all the documents relied upon by the Revenue need to be given to the assessee.
Shri Harshad Ramaniklal Mehta Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20599 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
ITAT - Late fees u/s 234E for assessee's delay in filing of TDS return in Form 24Q justified even though it was owing to “procedural default”.
GMV Services Vs ACIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20598 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 234E
-
The addition representing the disallowance of the income earned from the vegetable crops and the disallowance out of the agricultural operation expenditure is unsustainable.
Chandra Mouli Chowdary (HUF) Vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20597 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
-
There is no categoric denial to the averment that the petitioners were connected in some manner to the Augusta Westland case and to the Gautam Khaitan Group of companies.
The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Vs IDS Infotech Ltd. And another
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20596 (HC-P&H) · Section 127
-
The consent of the competent authorities, admittedly, has been obtained before passing of the impugned order. Therefore, the earlier refusal on 12.11.2018 is of no significance.
Vodafone Idea Ltd Vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20595 (HC-DELHI) · Section 127
-
S. 147/ 151: As the Act provides for sanction by the JCIT, the sanction by the CIT does not meet the requirement of the Act and the reopening notice is without jurisdiction. The fact that the sanction is granted by a superior officer is not relevant
PCIT vs. Khushbu Industries
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20582 (HC-BOMBAY) · Sections 147, 151
-
S. 4/ 56: Amount received by assessee for relinquishing secretaryship of educational society cannot be treated as a capital receipt. The question of the principle of capital asset being invoked does not arise. The receipt is assessable as income from other sources. It may have been a different matter if it was a case of life time appointment of the assessee as Secretary of the concerned Institution but no such evidence was produced by the assessee (CIT vs. Ramachandra Rao 330 ITR 0322 affirmed)
H. S. Ramchandra Rao vs. CIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20581 (SC) · Sections 4, 56
-
S. 147 Reopening of Bogus share capital/ premium: If the PCIT, while granting approval for issue of notice u/s. 148, has only mentioned “YES”, it establishes that the approving authority has given approval to the reopening of assessment in a mechanical manner without due application of mind. On this count the reassessment is not sustainable in the eyes of law and needs to be quashed (All imp judgements referred)
Blue Chip Developers (P) Ltd vs. ITO
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20580 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 147
-
The questions of law urged by the appellant, do not arise for consideration.
ROLLS-ROYCE PLC Vs DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20579 (HC-DELHI)
-
The Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned notices.
Mohan Ravi Vs The Income Tax Officer
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20578 (HC-MADRAS)
-
The whole Act of 1988 as it stood today inclusive of the amended provisions brought into force from 01.11.2016 onwards would apply irrespective of the period of purchase of the alleged Benami property.
Tulsiram and Manki Bai Vs ACIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20577 (HC-CHHATTISGARH)
-
Conducting of samagams and spiritual discourses are part of religious activities and religious activity in the context of the Hindu religion need not be confined to the activities incidental to a place of worship only, like a temple.
Bhagwan Shree Laxmi Narain Vs Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20576 (HC-DELHI) · Section 11
-
Any order passed by TPO subsequent to the reference made by AO shall not be given effect to, until a decision is taken by AO.
Essilor India Private Ltd Vs The ACIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20575 (HC-KARNATAKA)
-
Without first issuing a draft assessment order as is required u/s. 144C, the AO cannot pass a final order u/s. 172(4), and therefore, the assessment made in the case of the assessee is bad in law.
ISS Shipping India Pvt. Ltd Vs The Dy. CIT, (International Taxation)
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20574 (ITAT-RAJKOT) · Sections 144C, 172(4)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.