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

21,579 rulings

  1. Direct Tax ·Bombay High Court · 20 Jul 2019
    Neither of the decisions nor other decisions placed before us by the Counsel for the Petitioner, however, lays down the proposition in law that such requirement of hearing would include personal hearing.

    NARESH MANAKCHAND JAIN VERSUS PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-20 AND ORS.

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19696 (HC-BOMBAY) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79240&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip

  2. Direct Tax ·Gujarat High Court · 19 Jul 2019
    Section 24 of the Benami Act pertains to notice and attachment of property involved in benami transaction.

    VIRENDRA RAMANLAL SONI Vs DCIT

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19695 (HC-GUJARAT) · Sections 24, 147

  3. Direct Tax ·Calcutta High Court · 19 Jul 2019
    Since Interest subsidy and Power subsidy received by assessee co. constitute 'capital receipts' and do not fall within the pre-amended definition of 'income' u/s 2(24), therefore directs exclusion from book profits for MAT purposes u/s 115JB.

    Ankit Metal & Power Ltd Vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19694 (HC-CALCUTTA)

  4. Direct Tax ·Bombay High Court · 19 Jul 2019
    Crux of Section 19 of SICA is that where any waiver or concession is to be granted by the Central Government, State Government or the like under the scheme, the scheme would be circulated to such authority for its consent and only upon such consent being given, that such term in the scheme would be binding to such Government or authority.

    Olympia Industries Limited Vs Union of India & Ors.

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19693 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 19

  5. Direct Tax ·Supreme Court · 19 Jul 2019
    The new and amended method of accounting for NPAs was declared and notified in clear words. We therefore do not see any reason and ground to interfere with the finding on absence of failure to disclose full and true material facts.

    PUNJAB AND SIND BANK Vs PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 7

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19692 (SC)

  6. Direct Tax ·ITAT Delhi · 19 Jul 2019
    Interest income is to be taxed as income from other source, because interest on investment of surplus fund would not satisfy the principle of mutuality.

    Swarn Jayanti Rail Nagar Flat Owners Association Vs ITO

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19691 (ITAT-DELHI)

  7. Direct Tax ·ITAT Delhi · 19 Jul 2019
    Sec.54 benefit to assessee-individual (a non- resident), against long term capital gains [LTCG] arising on transfer of residential property to a builder under a Collaboration Agreement is allowed.

    Manisha Juneja Sawhney Vs DCIT

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19690 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 54

  8. Direct Tax ·ITAT Delhi · 19 Jul 2019
    CIT(A)'s order disallowing additional expenses of Rs.1026.08 million provided as expenditure by the assessee as no liability had arisen in the hands of the assesse is upheld.

    ONGC Videsh Ltd Vs Addl. CIT

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19689 (ITAT-DELHI)

  9. Direct Tax ·ITAT Delhi · 19 Jul 2019
    Transaction has to be examined as a whole and not on the basis of one or two single facts.

    Shri Sanat Kumar Vs ACIT

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19688 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 10(38)

  10. Direct Tax ·ITAT Chennai · 19 Jul 2019
    Asessee had raised three specific grounds w.r.t validity of re-assessment u/s.147, vagueness in notices u/s.148 & 143(2) before the CIT(A), however, CIT(A) did not adjudicate the said grounds, but only adjudicated the grounds on merits regarding the addition made by the AO.

    Shri N. Karuppusamy Vs The ITO

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19687 (ITAT-CHENNAI)

  11. Direct Tax ·ITAT Mumbai · 18 Jul 2019
    partly allows assessee's (JV between Tata and Lockheed Martin) miscellaneous petition [MA] u/s. 254(2) for AY 2011-12, rectifies mistakes in the original order but retains the final decision taken by the Tribunal in the original order to the effect that business of the assessee was not set up till the end of previous year and hence, assessee's claim for deduction of Rs. 2.10 crores as revenue expenses was not allowable.

    Tata Lockheed Martin Aerostrutures Limited Vs DCIT

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19686 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 254(2)

  12. Direct Tax ·ITAT Hyderabad · 17 Jul 2019
    We noticed that assessee has completed the registration on 07/03/2009 and the document indicates that it was prepared on 02/03/2009. The registration formalities were completed only on 07/03/2009 and suitably modifying the document in hand writing.

    INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD – 2, KURNOOL VERSUS B. NAGA MAHESH, KURNOOL

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19685 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=76456&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  13. Direct Tax ·ITAT Delhi · 17 Jul 2019
    Once borrowing has been made through the debentures and utilized for the purpose of business, it has been established through documentary evidence in the shape of agreements and correspondences for which, no contrary evidence has been placed on record, then surmises, conjectures and suspicion should not be made a basis to reject the claim of the appellant company.

    SHIVSAGAR BUILDERS P. LTD. VERSUS ACIT CIRCLE-23 (1), NEW DELHI.

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19684 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=76457&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  14. Direct Tax ·ITAT Kolkata · 17 Jul 2019
    It is now well settled that the expression “sufficient cause” is to be construed liberally in order to advance the substantial cause of justice and not strictly to defeat it.

    ALIT KUMAR SARKAR VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 (1), SILIGURI

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19683 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=76462&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  15. Direct Tax ·Kerala High Court · 19 Jul 2019
    Since the discontinuance of the business of the firm in cases at hand was with effect from 1.4.2004, we are in agreement that the assessment of the income received in any subsequent year need to be made in accordance with the procedure contemplated in Section 176 (3A).

    M/S. MUTHOOT BANKERS VERSUS THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOZHIKODE

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19682 (HC-KERALA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79221&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip

  16. Direct Tax ·Bombay High Court · 19 Jul 2019
    HCIt is also an admitted position that the petitioner had not intimated to the Department about her change of address. After receiving the envelope containing the notice from the postal department, till 31.3.2018 which was the last date for service of such notice, the department took no further steps.

    HARJEET SURAJPRAKASH GIROTRA VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19681 (HC-BOMBAY) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79224&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip

  17. Direct Tax ·ITAT Delhi · 18 Jul 2019
    FMV of property purchased for the purpose of resale, lying vacant under head inventory and meanwhile used for purpose of business could not be determined u/s 23(1) of the Act.

    Shivsagar Builders P. Ltd Vs ACIT

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19680 (ITAT-DELHI)

  18. Direct Tax ·ITAT Bangalore · 18 Jul 2019
    Right to life interest possessed by assessee is a right in personam that has to has to be relinquished, in order to absolutely transfer the property, with a clear title to the buyers.

    P.K. Vijayalakshmi Vs The Income tax Officer

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19679 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 54EC

  19. Direct Tax ·ITAT Delhi · 18 Jul 2019
    We come to the conclusion that the CIT(A) is not empowered to dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution of appeal and is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits. Once the Assessee files an appeal U/s 246A, the Assessee sets in motion the machinery designed for disposal of the appeal under Sections 250 and 251.

    PAWAN KUMAR SINGHAL VERSUS ACIT, CIRCLE -2, GHAZIABAD.

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19678 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=76442&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  20. Direct Tax ·ITAT Pune · 18 Jul 2019
    Assessment order in the case of the assessee was passed on 16.12.2011. During that time, therefore, the word “belong” was there and as facts and situation in this case, the diary recovered during the course of search from the premises of the Chhoriya Group did not belong to the assessee and therefore, provisions of Section 153C(1)(b) is not applicable to the case of the assessee since amendment itself come into place on 01.06.2015.

    SHRI RATANLAL C. BAFNA VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-1, JALGAON.

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19677 (ITAT-PUNE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=76446&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.


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.