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. ITAT Mumbai · 17 Mar 2021
    The decision rendered by co-ordinate bench for AY 2014-15 for all three appeals shall apply mutatis mutandis to this AY also.

    Sir Dorabji Tata Trust Vs Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29584 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  2. ITAT Delhi · 19 Mar 2021
    Revenue had decided the issue of beneficial ownership of interest only on the basis of information of assets and liabilities provided in the return of income which was mistakenly reported by assessee as Nil.

    Betoking Ltd Vs ACIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29583 (ITAT-DELHI)

  3. ITAT Mumbai · 19 Mar 2021
    Right to receive interest on government and other securities arises on due date only, which falls after the accounting year and accordingly, it cannot be taxed in the accounting year itself.

    STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs ACIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29576 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  4. ITAT Hyderabad · 16 Mar 2021
    Assessee is unable to establish that there was any contract for actual delivery of goods and, therefore, the condition precedent u/s 43(5)(a) is not satisfied.

    Agarwal Industries Pvt Ltd Vs Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29575 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)

  5. ITAT Delhi · 16 Mar 2021
    Notice issued by the revenue is bad in law if it did not specify under which limb of section 271(1)(c).

    FCI Asia Pte Ltd Vs DCIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29574 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 271(1)(c)

  6. ITAT Hyderabad · 19 Mar 2021
    To make a claim u/s 80IA, assessee is simply required to file RoI u/s 139(1).

    Delhi MSW Solutions Ltd Vs Dy.CIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29573 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · Section 80IA

  7. ITAT Delhi · 19 Mar 2021
    Any expense or allowance shall not be allowed from the income assessed u/s 69 but, this Section does not indicate that set off of brought forward business losses shall not be allowed from income assessed u/s 69 for the purpose of calculating tax u/s 115BBE.

    ACE Infracity Developers P. Ltd Vs DCIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29572 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 115BBE

  8. ITAT Delhi · 12 Mar 2021
    As soon as insolvency proceedings commenced under IBC 2016, all litigations are to be pursued by IRP and not by the company.

    Three C Shelters P. Ltd Vs ACIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29571 (ITAT-DELHI)

  9. ITAT Hyderabad · 12 Mar 2021
    Assessee has not paid any amount or expressed any willingness to pay 20% of outstanding demand of taxes subject to which stay can be granted as per section amended proviso to Sec.254(2A).

    Smt.Yashoda Gundavarapu R.R. Dt. Vs ITO

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29570 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · Section 254(2A)

  10. ITAT Mumbai · 12 Mar 2021
    The allegation that some flats were sold at higher rate is vague and general in nature without bringing on record cogent material.

    Shivji Amba Gami Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29569 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  11. ITAT Bangalore · 12 Mar 2021
    Since the quantum addition is deleted by the Tribunal, there is no question of levying of any penalty.

    Mahindra Electric Vehicles Ltd Vs JCIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29568 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 271(1)(c)

  12. ITAT Hyderabad · 12 Mar 2021
    Foreign allowances received by assessee-individual in respect of services performed in Netherlands during AY 2014-15 cannot be taxed in India.

    Venkata Rama Rao Vs ITO

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29567 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · Section 5(2)

  13. ITAT Pune · 02 Jul 2022
    Merely because the explanation furnished by Assessee’s brothers about the creditworthiness for the money advanced to the Assessee was found to be unacceptable to Revenue, it cannot be the reasons to disbelieve the explanation given by the Assessee.

    Maruti Nivrutti Navale Vs DCIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29566 (ITAT-PUNE) · Section 69A

  14. ITAT Chennai · 02 Jul 2022
    The Assessee cannot claim that she was ignorant of law and because of her ignorance, she could not file appeal against the order of the PCIT.

    Preeti Madhok Vs The Income Tax Officer

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29565 (ITAT-CHENNAI)

  15. ITAT Ahmedabad · 02 Jul 2022
    DDT was paid in time, however, owing to inadvertent mistake in filling the challan, Assessee cannot be denied its vested right to credit of the DDT amount deposited within due date.

    Strategic Infosystems Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29564 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)

  16. ITAT Mumbai · 02 Jul 2022
    Once a question of law was admitted by the HC in quantum proceedings, the issue becomes debatable and penalty under Section 271(1)(c) cannot be levied.

    Linklaters Vs ADIT (IT)-3 (2)

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29563 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  17. ITAT Cuttack · 02 Jul 2022
    When the Assessee is in judicial custody, his address during the period of judicial custody does not change and it cannot be said that the Assessee is absconding.

    Narayan Kumar Khaitan Vs ACIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29562 (ITAT-CUTTACK)

  18. ITAT Bangalore · 02 Jul 2022
    It is not in dispute that the Assessee is a resident in India in the instant case and thus the taxability of capital gains is to be determined in accordance with the provisions of the Act.

    Prabhukumar Aiyappa Kullatira Vs ITO

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29561 (ITAT-BANGALORE)

  19. ITAT Mumbai · 01 Jul 2022
    When an opportunity of presenting the case, through the video conferring in the faceless appeal proceedings, is now available to every taxpayer, on-demand, the same must also be held to be admissible in the proceedings, if so demanded by the assessee, in the old rules as well.

    Bank of India Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29554 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  20. ITAT Mumbai · 30 Jun 2022
    Expenditure on account of purchase of shares issued as ESOP is revenue in nature, thus, allowable under Section 37(1).

    Morgan Stanley Advantage Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29548 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

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.