-
In terms of the second proviso to Section 153 of the Act the period of extension for completing the assessment was deemed to be extended to one year and hence there was time till August, 2017 for the AO to complete the assessments.
ROHIT KUMAR GUPTA Vs PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19897 (HC-DELHI) · Section 245D(4)
-
The income was not directly derived from the business and had no direct nexus.
Bir Hotels Pvt. Ltd. Allahabad Vs Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax Range-Ii And Another
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19896 (HC-ALLAHABAD) · Section 80IB(7)(a)
-
Admission of substantial questions of law by the High Court leads credence to the bona fide of the assessee and therefore, the penalty is not exigible u/s 271(1)(c).
SYNDICATE BANK VERSUS THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), RANGE 3, BANGALORE.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19895 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77075&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The assessee trust was required to dispose or convert the assets not conforming to the requirement of Section 11(5) into permissible investment within one year from the end of the financial year in which such bonus shares or other assets are received or 31.03.1992 whichever is later and also held that the income over expenditure derived by the assessee during the previous year relevant to the assessment year 2001-02 is assessable at the maximum marginal rate.
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI. VERSUS M/S. KSHETROPASANA GOKULDHAM
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19894 (HC-MADRAS) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79628&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Amendment or no amendment, if the profit is estimated on any ground, whether ignoring books of accounts or rejection thereof, then there is no scope for allowability/disallowability of any deduction.
THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 VERSUS M/S. GANESH ROLLILNG SHUTTERS ENGINEERING WORKS
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19893 (HC-AP) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79630&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
It can straightaway be noticed that the crucial change is the substitution of the words ‘books of account or documents, seized or requisitioned belongs to or belong to a person other than the person referred to in Section 153A’ by two clauses i.e. a and b, where clause b is in the alternative and provides that ‘such books of account or documents, seized or requisitioned’ could ‘pertain’ to or contain information that ‘relates to’ a person other than a person referred to in Section 153A.
THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL-3 VERSUS M/S. DREAMCITY BUILDWELL PVT. LTD.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19892 (HC-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79631&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
While it is clear that relevant provision relied on by learned counsel for writ petitioner talks only about first appeal to the first appellate authority, the order of ITAT and stops with the same, there is another provision which deals with a scenario which does not fall in such a factual setting.
S. AJIT KUMAR VERSUS THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, NON-CORPORATE CIRCLE-20 (1), CHENNAI
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19891 (HC-MADRAS) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79632&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Commissioner has got mixed up in between the stipulations warranting exercise under Section 12AA(3) and Section 13(1) (b) in so far as it dis-entitles a trust or a charitable institution to the exclusion from the total income of the previous year, any income, if the same is used for benefit of any particular religious community or caste.
ST. MICHAELS EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION ST. MICHAELS HIGH SCHOOL VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX I
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19890 (HC-PATNA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79633&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
It would be a different matter, where the funds borrowed or advanced, are for business purpose, in which case the same would stand to be adjusted against the business purpose for which the amount stands paid or received, viz. an advance against purchase of goods, while in the instant case the monies received, directly or indirectly, have been met by repayment of monies, i.e., are loans or advances simpliciter, to which, as clarified, the provision is applicable.
G. G. Oils & Fats Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19889 (ITAT-AMRITSAR) · Section 2(22)(e)
-
There was reduction in the carry forward of the losses - In any case the carry forward of losses for the assessment year 2008- 09 are to be considered only in the year when the assessee reports positive income and the said loss brought forward from the earlier years is claimed to be set off against the profit of the year in future.
M/S THE AJMER URBAN COOPERATIVE BANK LTD. VERSUS THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1 AJMER.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19888 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77040&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
It is a definite and accrued liability of the assessee for the year for which the services have been rendered by the employees. It is nothing but additional variable salaries payable to the employees.
M/S. T.V. TODAY NETWORK LIMITED VERSUS ADDL. CIT RANGE- 16 NEW DELHI AND DCIT CIRCLE – 25 (2) , NEW DELHI VERSUS M/S. T.V. TODAY NETWORK LIMITED
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19887 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77042&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The finding rendered by the Tribunal that the price for which the shares were agreed to be sold is a justified reasonable price is a finding not supported by any document and therefore, perverse.
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VII, CHENNAI. VERSUS MP PURUSHOTHAMAN
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19886 (HC-MADRAS) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79608&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
CIT while issuing the show cause notice did not rely upon any independent material nor on any interpretation of law but on perusal of the records was of the view that the expenditure cannot be allowed as deduction.
KUMAR RAJARAM VERSUS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION - 2 (1) , CHENNAI
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19885 (HC-MADRAS) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79609&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Provision requires an employer before paying the employee his wages to deduct the employee's contribution along with the employer's own contribution as fixed by the Government.
M/S RMP BEARING LTD. THRU. RAJENDRA C. MAKWANA VERSUS DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 3 (1) (2)
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19884 (HC-GUJARAT) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79610&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
There is no dispute that the interest on fixed deposit are chargeable to tax, the appellant was under duty to deduct the same in absence of any returns filed by the Official Liquidator declaring losses and/or filing of a certificate under section 197A to declare NIL income.
BANK OF BARODA VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19883 (HC-PATNA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79613&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
S. 37(1): In the professional field there are innovative ways visualized by professionals to make themselves visible in the professional circle and to build their own professional profile for generating higher and value-added business such as sponsoring seminars, becoming knowledge partners, setting up prizes and awards, creating competitive award ceremonies, hosting vibrant summits etc. The way professionals promote themselves is changing very fast and benefits of such expenditure are huge and wide
Harish Narinder Salve vs. ACIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19882 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 37(1)
-
Low Tax Effect Appeals: Though CBDT Circular dated 8th August 2019, enhancing the monetary limits for Dept appeals, states that the "modifications shall come into effect from the date of issue of the Circular", it must be interpreted to mean that the enhanced limits apply not only to appeals to be filed in future but also to appeals pending for disposal as on now. It is an appreciable goodwill gesture by the Govt, for so many taxpayers, on the eve of this Independence Day and offering them freedom from the prolonged mental agony and uncertainty of litigation
ITO vs. Dinesh Madhavlal Patel
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19881 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
-
S. 50C + S. 10(38) Bogus Penny Stocks Capital Gains: (i) Though the 3rd Proviso to s. 50C, which provides a safe harbour of 5%, applies w.e.f. 01.04.2019, it must be interpreted to apply since the insertion of s. 50C (01.04.2003) because it is curative and removes an incongruity and avoids undue hardship to assesseess (ii) LTCG from penny stocks cannot be treated as bogus if the documentation is in order and no fault is found by the AO
Chandra Prakash Jhunjhunwala vs. DCIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19880 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · Section 50C
-
In the present case, with the passing of rectification order u/s 154 of the Act, original order passed u/s 143(3) will be substituted by the new order with denial of claim of deduction u/s 80P(2)(b).
BEED TALUKA DHUD VAVSAYIK SAHAKARI SANGH LIMITED VERSUS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD – 1, BEED.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19879 (ITAT-PUNE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77020&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Admittedly, in the instant case, the assessee was regularly filing his return of income at Delhi with his PAN No. linked with the AO at Delhi and he was residing at PS, Dwarka-Sector-9, South West District, New Delhi, in government accommodation and was getting salary from the Delhi Police, therefore, merely because the assessee has received the notice, which was sent in his Gurgaon address and has participated in the assessment proceedings will not give jurisdiction to the Assessing Officer at Gurgaon to have jurisdiction over the assessee.
ATTAR SINGH, C/O SHRI SUDESH GARG, ADVOCATE VERSUS ITO, WARD-1 (2), GURGAON. AND (VICE-VERSA)
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19878 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77021&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.