-
The finding of fact has been recorded by two revenue authorities that the payments made by the assessee on a single day did not exceed ₹ 20,000/- to a person and if, that be so, there could not have been any disallowance under Section 40A(3).
THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3 VERSUS RJD BUILDCON LIMITED
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19656 (HC-GUJARAT) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79193&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The findings of fact recorded by the tribunal that no material was recovered during the search as per the provisions of section 153(C), which could have been treated as incriminating material and which have been made as a base for supporting the action of the department.
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX SURAT-1 VERSUS AMIT VASANTLAL SHAH
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19655 (HC-GUJARAT) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79194&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The assessee's own case for the assessment year 2003-04, three substantial questions of law raised in this appeal were considered and they were decided against the revenue and in favour of the assessee. While allowing the expenditure on Research & Development, after analysing the facts of assessee.
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI VERSUS M/S. TVS MOTORS LIMITED
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19654 (HC-MADRAS) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79191&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Notice u/s 148 is a jurisdictional notice, has been issued to a dead person. Upon receipt of such notice, the legal representative has raised an objection to the validity of such notice and has not complied with the same.
BIPINBHAI BACHUBHAI KATARIA L/R OF LATE BACHUBHAI RAMBHAI KATARIA VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19653 (HC-GUJARAT) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79195&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Royalty is taxable in India if the payer an Indian resident, except where the royalty is payable in respect of a right, property, information or service used for the payer's business outside India or for earning income outside India.
Rackspace US Inc Vs The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, (International Taxation)
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19652 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
A pronouncement by this Court, even if it cannot be strictly called the ratio decidendi of the judgment, would certainly be binding on the High Court.
The Peerless Gen.Fin And Investment Company Limited Vs Commnr. Of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19651 (SC)
-
On a perusal of the orders passed by the Tribunal, we find that what weighed in the mind of the Tribunal is primarily because the quantum assessment had attained finality and that the assessee had not challenged the said assessment. This, in our considered view, is an incorrect interpretation because both the quantum assessment as well as the penalty proceedings are independent of each other.
R. REVATHY VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI CENTRAL-I, CHENNAI
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19650 (HC-MADRAS) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79179&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Notice was issued u/s 148 on the ground that the holding company ceased to hold whole of the share capital of the subsidiary company, the exemption granted has to be withdrawn as per provision of Section 47A. The original sale of the textile unit has to be treated as transfer and net worth has to be subjected to capital gains treating this transactions as a slump sales as per provisions of Section 50B.
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX -I, COIMBATORE. VERSUS M/S. SHIVA DISTILLERIES LIMITED
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19649 (HC-MADRAS) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79180&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The test laid down by Lord Cave L.C. in British Insulated and Helsby Cables Ltd., was to the effect that when an expenditure is made, not only once and for all, but with a view to bringing into existence an asset or an advantage for the enduring benefit of a trade, there was very good reason for treating such expenditure as properly attributable not to revenue, but to capital.
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANAJI. VERSUS SALGAOCAR MINING INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19648 (HC-BOMBAY) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79181&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Petitioner has sought a clarification regarding the erroneous payment of the surcharge. Indeed the Court finds that the payment of tax on FTS under the DTAA included surcharge and cess etc. There was no requirement that once the tax rate at the appropriate slab was paid, to separately pay the surcharge and cess.
M/S. EPCOS ELECTRONIC COMPONENTS S.A VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19647 (HC-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79182&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The Court is unable to find any legal error committed by the ITAT in dismissing the appeal of the present Appellant.
SUSHIL BANSAL VERSUS PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -19
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19646 (HC-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79183&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The impugned transaction cannot be regarded as colorable device merely on the reasoning that there is no tax liability arising in the hands of the assessee.
Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries Ltd vs. ACIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19645 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
-
An amount can be assessed u/s 2(22) (e), only when funds belonging to the company are utilized by the shareholder for his own benefit, however in case of assessee the car was purchased out of his own money and was not sourced from the funds belonging to the company.
Sajid S. Nadiadwala Vs ACIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19644 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 2(22)(e)
-
Directorate of Income- tax(Investigation) an internal agency/wing of Income tax Department which works under the aegis of its controlling authority CBDT and cannot be considered to be an 'external source'.
Late Shri Amarchand P Shah by Legal Heir Shri Nitin A Shah Vs Income Tax Officer
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19643 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Client Code modification made by the broker are made by broker itself.
Canara Securities Ltd Vs DCIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19642 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
-
A claim which is legally allowable cannot be disallowed for the reason that the same was pointed out in the course of assessment proceedings by way of filing of revised computation of income.
Karmen International P. Ltd Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19641 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Section 80IA
-
Shares and units of a mutual fund' are two separate types of securities.
Sri. K. E. Faizal Vs The Dy.Commissioner of Income-tax (International Taxation)
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19640 (ITAT-COCHIN)
-
Since funds contributed by society members for meeting their own expenses and interest earned on deposit of such funds attain the character of corpus fund, therefore principles of mutuality would apply and the interest income cannot be brought to tax.
Windsor Home Owners Welfare Association Vs ITO
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19639 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
-
Explanation 5A below Section 271 of the Act would apply only in case of searched person and cannot be extended to the person other than the searched person.
RAJKUMAR GULAB BADGUJAR Vs PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19638 (SC) · Section 271(1)(c)
-
Expenditure incurred in respect of renovation of leased premises is to be treated as capital in nature.
E.T.A. Travel Agency (P) Ltd Vs The Commissioner of IncomeTax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19637 (HC-MADRAS) · Section 32
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.