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 Panaji · 07 May 2022
    The addition of a trading liability which had ceased can only be made in the previous year in which some benefit in respect of such trading liability by way of remission or cessation thereof, is obtained by the Assessee.

    Milroc Good Earth Property and Developers LLP Vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29027 (ITAT-PANAJI)

  2. ITAT Chennai · 07 May 2022
    There is no reason to deprive the assessee of the normal entitlement which would flow out of the provisions of section 70 of the Act.

    TVS Motor Company Ltd. Vs The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29026 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Section 80-IC

  3. ITAT Delhi · 06 May 2022
    The fee received by the Assessee under the Centralized Services Agreement cannot be treated as FIS either under Article 12(4)(a) or 12(4)(b) of the India-USA DTAA and in absence of PE in India, cannot be taxable as business income as well.

    Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide Inc. Vs ACIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29019 (ITAT-DELHI)

  4. Delhi High Court · 06 May 2022
    Aditional time of fifteen days should be counted from Mar 17, 2022.

    Interglobe Aviation Limited Vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29018 (HC-DELHI)

  5. ITAT Delhi · 05 May 2022
    There was nothing on record to suggest that DHR Holding was acting as an agent wholly and exclusively for the Assessee and not in its regular course of business to make it a PE under Article 5(9) of the Treaty.

    AB Sciex Pte. Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29011 (ITAT-DELHI)

  6. ITAT Bangalore · 05 May 2022
    The amount reimbursed by the Assessee to the overseas entity cannot be subjected to tax in India as there does not involve any element of income embedded in it.

    Goldman Sachs Services Pvt. Ltd Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29010 (ITAT-BANGALORE)

  7. Gujarat High Court · 04 May 2022
    Interest awarded by the MACT is not taxable under the Income-tax Act.

    The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd Vs CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS)

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29004 (HC-GUJARAT) · Section 145A(b)

  8. ITAT Bangalore · 04 May 2022
    Exclusion of ‘other income’ in only one leg of the computing net income and effective rate of tax in Ghana is not the right approach. The comparison of the rate thus computed with the Indian rate of tax will not be correct in the interest of justice.

    Invendis Technologies India Private Limited Vs The Asst. Commissioner of Income tax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29003 (ITAT-BANGALORE)

  9. Madras High Court · 07 May 2021
    Assessee should comply with the directions in SCN and intimate the AO accordingly within a period of 3 weeks.

    Magick Woods Exports Private Limited Vs Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax/Income Tax Officer, National e-Assessment Centre

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28996 (HC-MADRAS)

  10. ITAT Delhi · 07 May 2021
    On perusal of agreement that payment on cost to cost basis did not involve any profit element, the reimbursement would not be liable to TDS.

    TS-345-ITAT-2021DEL-Airports_Authority_of_India

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28995 (ITAT-DELHI)

  11. ITAT Surat · 14 May 2021
    Income Tax Officer is not only an adjudicator but also an investigator it is his duty to ascertain the truth of facts stated in return when the circumstances of the case are such as to provoke an inquiry.

    Mehulbhai Durlabhjibhai Vithalani Vs The ACIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28994 (ITAT-SURAT) · Section 263

  12. ITAT Hyderabad · 10 May 2021
    It is evident that the CIT(E) while granting registration was satisfied about charitable nature of Assessee’s activities.

    Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University Vs Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28993 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · Section 12A

  13. ITAT Mumbai · 06 May 2021
    The tax u/s 115-O is a tax on dividend.

    ITD Cementation India Ltd Vs DCIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28992 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  14. ITAT Hyderabad · 07 May 2021
    Assessee would not be entitled to deduction of payment made in contravention of law or opposed to public policy or of unlawful nature.

    Eyegear Optics India Pvt. Ltd Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28991 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · Section 37

  15. ITAT Chennai · 07 May 2021
    Revenue is directed to recompute the long term capital gain by adopting the value determined by the DVO in terms of section 50C.

    G.Sampath Vs The Income Tax Officer

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28990 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Section 50C

  16. ITAT Ahmedabad · 07 May 2021
    Commercial expediency of a businessman's decision to incur a particular expenditure cannot be tested on the touchstone of strict legal liability to incur such expenditure.

    Deloitee Haskins and Sells Vs D.C.I.T.

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28989 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)

  17. ITAT Mumbai · 14 May 2021
    Speculative transactions are eligible to be set off against the loss of share transactions.

    Cascade Holdings Pvt. Ltd Vs DCIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28988 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  18. ITAT Chandigarh · 05 May 2021
    In the absence of reliable and irrefutable evidence failing to call forth and making necessary enquiries, the tax officials have failed to live up to the trust reposed in them by the citizen and the State.

    Ashok Kumar Vs The ITO

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28987 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH) · Section 69

  19. Delhi High Court · 02 May 2022
    Compounding of offences cannot be taken as the matter of right, it is for the law and authorities to determine as to what kind of offences should be compounded, if at all, and under what conditions.

    Maspar Industries Private Limited & Ors Vs CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX TDS & ANR.

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28980 (HC-DELHI)

  20. Karnataka High Court · 02 May 2022
    In the instant case it was axiomatic that the AO considered Section 56(2)(vii)(c) not to be attracted at all, rather than being unaware of the market price of the shares as alleged.

    Azim Premji Trustee Company Pvt. Ltd Vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28979 (HC-KARNATKATA)

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.