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

15,819 rulings

  1. ITAT Ahmedabad · 14 May 2022
    Intimation issued under Section 143(1) is against first proviso to Section 143(1)(a), and entire exercise under Section 143(1) is invalid in law.

    Arham Pumps Vs DCIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29071 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · Section 143(1)

  2. ITAT Mumbai · 14 May 2022
    There was no positive balance of the capital account of the Assessee with the firm and thus the question of balance in her capital account being returned to her certainly did not arise.

    Ramona Pinto Vs ACIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29070 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 28(iv)

  3. ITAT Bangalore · 14 May 2022
    CAM charges are in the nature of contractual payments made for availing maintenance services and they are not paid for use of any premises / equipment.

    Lifestyle International Pvt. Ltd Vs The Asst. Commissioner of Income tax TDS

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29069 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Sections 194C, 194-I

  4. Gauhati High Court · 13 May 2022
    Revenue shall proceed de novo from the stage of reply to show cause notice by the Assessee.

    Abhinav Mittal Vs UNION OF INDIAAND 2 ORS.

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29062 (HC-GAUHATI) · Section 148A(d)

  5. Delhi High Court · 13 May 2022
    If the law permits Revenue to take further steps in the matter, they shall be at liberty to do so. Needless to state that if and when such steps are taken and if the petitioner has a grievance, it shall be at liberty to take its remedies in accordance with law.

    Indus Towers Ltd Vs INCOME TAX OFFICER & ORS

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29061 (HC-DELHI)

  6. ITAT Mumbai · 13 May 2022
    Where huge amounts credited to the bank account of the assessee, source of which is not explained, the provision of section 68 of the Act are applicable.

    Nayan Arvind Lalan Vs The Income Tax Officer

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29060 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  7. Bombay High Court · 12 May 2022
    The exchange traded derivative transaction carried on by the assessee prior to insertion of Section 43(5)(d) were speculative transactions the loss incurred in those transactions were liable to be treated as speculative loss and not business loss.

    Souvenir Developers (I) Pvt. Ltd Vs The Union of India

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29053 (HC-BOMBAY) · Sections 43(5), 73

  8. ITAT Chennai · 11 May 2022
    ESPN India is merely a reseller of advertisement space it purchases on ESPN UK’s website.

    ESPN Digital Media (India) Pvt. Ltd Vs The DCIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29046 (ITAT-CHENNAI)

  9. ITAT Hyderabad · 11 May 2022
    The word remitted to or received in Article 24 have to be interpreted literally and By any stretch of reasoning, the word 'remitted' cannot be read as accrued for the purposes of Article 24.

    PACC Container Line Pvt. Ltd Vs ITO

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29045 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)

  10. Calcutta High Court · 10 May 2022
    Decision was required to be taken by the PCIT on merits of the matter.

    Unisource Hydro Carbon Services Private Limited & Anr Vs Unisource Hydro Carbon Services Private Limited & anr.

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29044 (HC-CALCUTTA)

  11. ITAT Hyderabad · 10 May 2022
    When there was a mistake, error or omission on part of the Tribunal, then it is the duty of Tribunal to set it right.

    GVPR Engineers Ltd Vs The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29043 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)

  12. ITAT Delhi · 11 May 2022
    Since the conditions of Article 12(4)(b) are not satisfied, the amount received cannot be treated as FTS.

    Microstrategy Singapore Pte. Ltd Vs ACIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29042 (ITAT-DELHI)

  13. ITAT Delhi · 10 May 2022
    Merely because the training program was of boarding nature, that cannot change the nature of program to fall in the purview of services, for which consideration should be FIS.

    Russell Reynolds Associates Inc Vs DCIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29041 (ITAT-DELHI)

  14. Madras High Court · 09 May 2022
    There must be concealment of income by the assessee or the assessee must have furnished inaccurate particulars of income in order to attract Section 276 C.

    Noorjahan Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29040 (HC-MADRAS) · Section 276C

  15. ITAT Delhi · 09 May 2022
    The Assessee was not obliged to deduct tax at source under Section 195 while remitting the amount to GT UK LLP.

    Grant Thornton Advisory (P.) Ltd Vs DCIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29039 (ITAT-DELHI)

  16. ITAT Bangalore · 07 May 2022
    There is no uncertainty that service tax paid on input services is an item of expenditure deductible under Section 37(1).

    Intuit India Product Development Center Pvt. Ltd Vs The ACIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29032 (ITAT-BANGALORE)

  17. ITAT Bangalore · 07 May 2022
    Assessee is directed not to seek adjournment and cooperate in the hearing of the appeal.

    Infosys Ltd Vs The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29031 (ITAT-BANGALORE)

  18. ITAT Ahmedabad · 07 May 2022
    The AO before drawing any adverse inference against the assessee, should have cross verified from the donors by issuing notice under section 133(6)/131.

    Atul H. Patel Vs I.T.O.

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29030 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · Section 68

  19. ITAT Bangalore · 07 May 2022
    When the assessee’s husband has not given money for purchase of property, how it can be held that her husband was owner of 50% of the property merely for the reason that his name appears in the conveyance agreement and also in the rental agreement.

    Y. Manjula Reddy Vs ITO

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29029 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 54F

  20. ITAT Panaji · 07 May 2022
    The Assessee was liable to deduct tax under Section 194C and defaulted in terms of Section 201, thus, liable to pay interest under Section 201(1A).

    EID Parry India Limited Vs Income Tax Officer (TDS)

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29028 (ITAT-PANAJI) · Section 194C

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.