-
The advertisement and publicity expenditure incurred by the Assessee to increase awareness and popularity of Livpure brand cannot be said to have incurred wholly or exclusively for the purpose of business to claim it as revenue expenditure but have enduring benefits for indefinite period to treat it as capital expenditure.
Livpure P Ltd Vs Addl. CIT
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31048 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
Addition of employee's contribution to the PF and ESI under Section 36(1)(va) through adjustment under Section 143(1) is not permissible.
Paris Elysees India Private Limited Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31047 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · Section 143(1)
-
In absence of specifications of the shares purchased by two persons in the sale deed, it must be held that both purchased equal shares.
Shivani Madan Vs ACIT
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31046 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
DRP’s directions passed in contradiction to HC ruling in Assessee’s own case allowing DTAA benefit on interest income earned by Assessee, is not justified.
Green Maiden A 2013 Trust Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31045 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
PCIT invoked Explanation 2(a) to Section 263 while passing the revisionary order but the Explanation was not invoked while issuing the notice.
Sodexo India Services Private Limited Vs PCIT
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31037 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
The reassessment notices issued to the petitioners in this bunch of writ petitions, on or after Apr 1, 2021 for AY 2013-14 to 2017-18 are to be dealt with, accordingly, by the Revenue.
Rajeev Bansal & Ors Vs Union Of India And 3 Others
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31036 (HC-ALLAHABAD)
-
The amount paid by GIPL to the Assessee with reference to seconded employees does not come within the FIS under the Act or DTAA and the addition is liable to be deleted.
Google LLC Vs JCIT (OSD) (IT), DCIT (IT)
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31035 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
-
Search and seizure action, being highly intrusive in nature, must be conducted scrupulously in line with the parameters set out under the Statute and applicable Rules.
Anil Jain Vs Principal Director General of Income Tax
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31033 (HC-MADRAS) · Sections 120, 132
-
The provisions of Section 254 are not applicable for adjudication of the application for recall of the order.
CEMENT CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD Vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31026 (HC-DELHI)
-
Fees received by Israeli company from its Indian subsidiary towards information technology and SAP support services is not in the nature of FTS under Article 13 of India-Israel DTAA due to non-fulfilment of make available condition.
Netafim Ltd Vs DCIT
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31025 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
The Assessee cannot contend that he was not afforded a personal hearing since he was granted several opportunities to respond to the notices under Section 142(1) and 143(2), which the Assessee failed to respond to.
Suyambulingam Suresh Vs The Income Tax Officer
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31018 (HC-MADRAS)
-
Assessee has discharged its onus and the addition under Section 68 on account unexplained cash credit is liable to be deleted.
Direct Logistics India Private Limited Vs Income Tax Officer
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31011 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 68
-
The word 'is received' under Section 153(3) cannot be construed to mean 'till it is received' as such interpretation would extend the limitation in perpetuity which contrary to intention of legislature.
Late Mr. Lakhpatrai Agarwal through L/H Sunil L. Agarwal Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31010 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 153(3)
-
There is a separate procedure prescribed in Section 144C for carrying out assessment of non-resident Indians, however, the said procedure has not been complied by the Revenue in the present case.
Gigy Antony Vs INCOME-TAX OFFICER
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31009 (HC-KERALA) · Section 144C
-
The Assessee cannot be denied the deduction towards application and accumulation of funds and the addition is liable to be deleted.
Mulki Sundar Ram Shetty Nagar Ayyappa Swamy Temple Trust Vs ITO
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31008 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
-
There is dissonance between the show cause notice under Section 148A(b) and order passed under Section 148A(d).
Sunita Sharma Vs ITO
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31007 (HC-DELHI) · Section 148A(d)
-
Where no limitation is prescribed on the payment to non-resident, the statutory authorities must initiate action within a reasonable time of 4 years.
Subex Technologies Limited Vs THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31006 (HC-KARNATKATA)
-
The treaty benefit cannot be denied to the Assessee even if the domestic GAAR provisions are applied as the transaction took place prior to the cut off date of Apr 1, 2017 and the short term capital is less than the threshold of Rs.3 Cr.
Reverse Age Health Services Pte Ltd Vs DCIT
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 30999 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
At the whims and fancies of the principal Commissioner of income tax provisions of explanation (2) (a) of section 263 cannot be invoked, but should be invoked where the order is passed without making enquiries and verification, which should have been made by AO.
Bhuvneshwari Vyapaar Private Limited Vs PCIT
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 30998 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Undoubtedly the factum of willful default is well propelled and the complainant agency has succeeded in proving their case beyond reasonable doubt.
Hema Chetan Shah Vs Government of India
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 30997 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.