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

Direct Tax landmark rulings

15,812 rulings

  1. Madras High Court · 24 Dec 2022
    Only a primary society engaged in supplying milk by its members is entitled for deduction under Section 80P(2)(b)(i) and not the union of primary societies.

    The Salem District Co-op. Milk Producers Union Ltd Vs The Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30674 (HC-MADRAS) · Section 80P(2)

  2. ITAT Chennai · 24 Dec 2022
    The issue of amendment brought in Section 80JJA by inserting proviso which has relaxed condition in regard to number of days of employment of new employees has been interpreted as retrospective in nature.

    Craftsman Automation Pvt. Ltd Vs The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30673 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Section 80JJAA

  3. ITAT Bangalore · 24 Dec 2022
    Payment made to Google Ireland under the Adwords Programme cannot be characterized as royalty under the India-Ireland DTAA.

    Google India Private Ltd Vs The JDIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30672 (ITAT-BANGALORE)

  4. ITAT Mumbai · 24 Dec 2022
    Merely because interest of the housing loan on the said property was claimed by the Assessee’s son in his computation of income, does not make him the owner of the property.

    Mumtaz Abdul Aziz Vs ITO

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30671 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  5. Calcutta High Court · 24 Dec 2022
    Assessment order can be set aside in case of violation of natural justice irrespective of the fact that appellate remedy exists against the said order.

    Green Valliey Industries Limited Vs Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department & Ors.

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30670 (HC-CALCUTTA)

  6. Bombay High Court · 24 Dec 2022
    Revenue is directed to consider Assessee’s rectification application within a period of three months from passing this order and pass a speaking order with respect to contingent liability of Rs.42.94 Cr.

    Sodexo India Services Private Limited Vs CENTRALIZED PROCESING CENTRE AND OTHERS

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30669 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 143(1)

  7. Chhattisgarh High Court · 24 Dec 2022
    There is, prima facie, some material on the basis of which the Department could reopen the case. The petitioner had not even made an attempt to assert that the material facts relied on in the SCN is erroneous.

    Barbrik Projects Ltd Vs Union of India

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30668 (HC-CHHATTISGARH)

  8. ITAT Bangalore · 23 Dec 2022
    If investments made in Infosys BPO which did not yield any exempt income, is excluded from computation as per Rule 8D.

    Infosys Ltd Vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30661 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 10AA

  9. ITAT Mumbai · 22 Dec 2022
    When all the necessary facts are before the ITAT, it was a mistake apparent on record to remit the matter back on a question of law.

    Blackstone FP Capital Partners Mauritius V Limited Vs DCIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30654 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  10. Delhi High Court · 22 Dec 2022
    Revenue is directed to not give effect to any decision which is adverse to the Assessee's interest for four weeks from service of the order.

    Vodafone Mauritius Limited Vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30653 (HC-DELHI)

  11. ITAT Mumbai · 21 Dec 2022
    Royalty income that accrues in India as per Section 5 of the Act and the royalty income that is deemed to accrue in India with the aid of Section 9 read with Section 5 of the Act would be considered as royalties that arises in India for the purpose of Article 12(1) and Article 12(2) of the DTAA.

    Global Cricket Corporation Pte Ltd Vs ADIT (IT) 3(1)

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30652 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  12. Bombay High Court · 21 Dec 2022
    CIT(A) is directed to decide the application under Rule 46A for admission of additional evidence as well as appeal within 3 months.

    Humuza Consultants Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30651 (HC-BOMBAY)

  13. Gujarat High Court · 21 Dec 2022
    The Directors cannot be said to be negligent merely because they were unable to deposit 20% of the demand raised in the assessment order for seeking stay from the appellate authority.

    Devendra Babulal Jain Vs INCOME TAX OFFICER

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30650 (HC-GUJARAT) · Section 179

  14. Karnataka High Court · 21 Dec 2022
    In absence of any reasons as to why and how the demand would be defeated by the petitioner, mere apprehension that huge tax demands are likely to be raised on completion of assessment was not sufficient to constitute formation of opinion.

    Xiaomi Technology India Pvt. Ltd Vs DCIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30643 (HC-KARNATKATA)

  15. ITAT Mumbai · 20 Dec 2022
    Payments made by Shoppers Stop to various vendors for procurement of footwear under sale or return agreement is not in the nature of work contract, thus provisions of Section 194C are not applicable.

    Shoppers Stop Limited Vs ACIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30642 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 194C

  16. Delhi High Court · 20 Dec 2022
    Assessee, merely by filing the revised return of income declaring the maximum credit balance in the said undisclosed bank account, cannot evade the judicial process of law for not disclosing his correct income and foreign account since the year 1991.

    Rajinder Kumar Vs STATE & ANR.

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30641 (HC-DELHI)

  17. ITAT Mumbai · 19 Dec 2022
    Free sample of medicines supplied to doctors is for promotion of the product of the pharmaceutical company, thus is wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the business of the company and allowable under Section 37(1).

    Merk Limited Vs DCIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30640 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 37(1)

  18. ITAT Mumbai · 19 Dec 2022
    The amendment in Section 149(1)(c) by Finance Act, 2012 extending the limitation period to sixteen years could not be resorted for reopening the assessment where time had already expired before the amendment became effective.

    Deval D. Thakkar Vs DCIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30639 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  19. Bombay High Court · 17 Dec 2022
    The draft assessment order issued earlier was conspicuously silent on the issue of depreciation of goodwill and would not make the subsequent order of assessment good, without there being a satisfactory compliance with the provisions of Section 144B(1)(xvi).

    Acme Housing India Private Limited. Vs National Faceless Assessment Centre and 3 Others

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30632 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 144B(1)(xvi)

  20. ITAT Delhi · 17 Dec 2022
    The benefit of deduction under Section 35(2AB) on scientific research expenditure cannot be denied merely due to non-receipt of Form 3CL.

    Curadev Pharma Pvt. Ltd Vs ITO

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 30631 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 35(2AB)

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.