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

21,598 rulings

  1. Direct Tax ·ITAT Ahmedabad · 06 Jun 2019
    ITAT - Expenditure incurred in the earlier year can be met out of the income of the subsequent year and utilization of such income would amount to income application for charitable or religious trusts u/s. 11.

    Shree Bhartimaiya memorial Foundation Vs Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19400 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · Section 11

  2. Direct Tax ·ITAT Visakhapatnam · 06 Jun 2019
    ITAT - In the case of employees of the State or Corporations, fixed conveyance/ other allowances are exempt u/s 10(14) and expenses vouchers submission also not necessary.

    Thangirala Immanuel Vs Income Tax Officer

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19399 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM)

  3. Direct Tax ·ITAT Ahmedabad · 06 Jun 2019
    ITAT - HUF is not covered within the definition of relative as prescribed u/s 40A(2)(b), hence commission to own HUF by Karta is not covered by 'related party payments'.

    Prataprai G. Rohra Vs The ACIT

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19398 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · Section 40A(2)

  4. Direct Tax ·ITAT Cochin · 06 Jun 2019
    ITAT - Exemption u/s.11/12 cannot be denied on the ground that return was not filed within Sec. 139(1) due-date.

    Kunhitharuvai Memorial Charitable Trust Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19397 (ITAT-COCHIN) · Section 11

  5. Direct Tax ·ITAT Chennai · 05 Jun 2019
    ITAT - One-time non-refundable storage fees (on account of storage of stem cells for a period of 21 years) is taxable on 'receipt' basis

    Lifecell International Pvt. Ltd Vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19396 (ITAT-CHENNAI)

  6. Direct Tax ·ITAT Kolkata · 04 Jun 2019
    Income arising from sale of designs and drawings, cannot be classified as royalty / FTS.

    Outotec (Finland) Oy Vs DCIT(International Taxation)

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19383 (ITAT-KOLKATA)

  7. Direct Tax ·ITAT Mumbai · 03 Jun 2019
    Exemption provisions should be interpreted strictly and in case ambiguity, benefit of such ambiguity must be interpreted in favour of the Revenue.

    Lok Housing & Construction Ltd Vs DCIT (OSD)-8(1)

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19377 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 80-IB(10)

  8. Direct Tax ·ITAT Delhi · 31 May 2019
    ITAT - Director-shareholder was professionally highly qualified and the bonus was duly offered to tax hence deduction for bonus paid over 100% of Salary to director-shareholder allowed.

    Bmr Business Solutions Pvt. Ltd Vs DCIT

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19364 (ITAT-DELHI)

  9. Direct Tax ·ITAT Chennai · 31 May 2019
    ITAT - Assessee has purchased the shares of penny stocks companies at lesser amount and within a year sold such shares at much higher amount hence no LTCG exemption u/s 10(38).

    Harish Kumar HUF Vs The Income Tax Officer

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19363 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Section 10(38)

  10. Direct Tax ·ITAT Mumbai · 31 May 2019
    ITAT - Payment to Singapore sister concern for providing standard bandwith services is not 'royalty' under India-Singapore DTAA.

    Reliance Jio Infocomm Ltd Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (IT)

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19362 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  11. Direct Tax ·ITAT Mumbai · 31 May 2019
    Since the consideration under the service agreement cannot be taxed as FIS, therefore the receipt cannot be treated as royalty as there is no transfer of process or formula.

    The Nielsen Company (US) LLC Vs DCIT (IT) - 4(2)

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19361 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  12. Direct Tax ·Delhi High Court · 31 May 2019
    Re-assessment notice u/s 148 issued beyond 4 years is disallowed, as there was no failure of assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts in original assessment.

    Best Cybercity (India) Pvt. Ltd Vs INCOME TAX OFFICER

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19360 (HC-DELHI)

  13. Direct Tax ·ITAT Mumbai · 30 May 2019
    Since surrendering of allotment of flat has to be considered as a right in property which is a capital asset, therefore assessee can claim Sec. 54 benefit against capital gain arising from surrender of such right.

    Ashwin. S. Bhalekar Vs The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19355 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 54

  14. Direct Tax ·ITAT Kolkata · 30 May 2019
    Since original 'reopening reasons' are dropped, therefore re-assessment based on new ground is disallowed.

    Aryan Mining & Trading Corporation Ltd Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle-2(2)

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19354 (ITAT-KOLKATA)

  15. Direct Tax ·ITAT Bangalore · 29 May 2019
    Asset is not restricted to building, plant or furniture, but is extended to knowhow, patent, copyright etc.

    CAE India Pvt. Ltd Vs CIT

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19347 (ITAT-BANGALORE)

  16. Direct Tax ·ITAT Delhi · 29 May 2019
    Contributions by one society to another having similar objects have to be considered a legitimate application of income by a charitable society.

    ICFAI University Vs Income Tax Officer

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19346 (ITAT-DELHI)

  17. Direct Tax ·ITAT Mumbai · 28 May 2019
    In case of short TDS, no Sec.40(a)(ia) expense disallowance.

    Hindustan Thompson Associates Private Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income - tax

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19339 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 40(a)(ia)

  18. Direct Tax ·ITAT Mumbai · 28 May 2019
    The cost of acquisition of know- how under development being a self-generated asset is not ascertainable, and hence, no chargeable capital gains would arise.

    Bharat Serums And Vaccines Ltd Vs ACIT

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19338 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  19. Direct Tax ·ITAT Delhi · 28 May 2019
    ITAT - The final assessment order has been passed after the end of one month from the date of receipt of the directions of the DRP by the Assessing Officer. Therefore, order passed by the Assessing Officer is void ab initio and liable to be quashed as the final assessment order is time barred.

    M/S. DENTSPLY INDIA (P) LTD. VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-10 (1) NEW DELHI

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19334 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=75431&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  20. Direct Tax ·ITAT Mumbai · 28 May 2019
    ITAT - Valuation - property in question cannot be valued as has been directed by the CIT in view of the litigations underway and also the fact that the property is in the possession of the tenants.

    WHITE ROSE HOLDINGS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. VERSUS ITO-13 (3) (2), MUMBAI

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19333 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=75432&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.