-
A mere non-disclosure of a foreign asset in the income tax return, by itself, is not a valid reason for a penalty under the BMA.
Leena Gandhi Tiwari Vs Additional Commissioner of Income Tax
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28726 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
The Revenue’s adoption of fair value for making the addition is not in accordance with the provisions and was righty deleted by the CIT(A).
Kilitch Healthcare India Ltd Vs DCIT-6( 3)( 2)
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28725 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 56(2)(viib)
-
Entire edifice of the assessment order was voluntariness to buy peace and avoid litigation which Revenue noted and accepted in the assessment order, thus, there was no question of misreporting.
Schneider Electric South East Asia (Hq) Pte Ltd Vs ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28724 (HC-DELHI)
-
Notices issued after Apr 01, 2021 are unsustainable and bad in law even if one was to apply the impugned Explanations to the Notifications, since they do not cover Section 147 (as amended) which empowers the Revenue reopen an assessment subject to Sections 148 to 153, which includes Section 148A.
Tata Communications Transformation Services Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 14(1)
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28723 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
The income earned by the Assessee from the Indian customers with respect to the subscription fees for CRM cannot be taxed as royalty as per section 9(1)(vi) as well as Article 12(3) of the treaty.
Salesforce.com Singapore Pte Vs The Dy. D.I.T
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28722 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
Immunity granted by a tax amnesty scheme in respect of liabilities under some enactments, did not afford protection against action under other enactments or law.
M. R. Shah Logistics Pvt. Ltd Vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28721 (SC)
-
Assessee’s case was selected for reassessment since it was flagged in Non-Filers Monitoring System.
Vodafone Luxembourg 5 S A R L Vs INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL - TAX 3 (1)(1)
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28720 (HC-DELHI)
-
In exercise of powers under Article 226 the courts require to independently consider the issues involved.
Vishal Ashwin Patel Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28715 (SC)
-
The collection charges paid by AAI to the Assessee, nothing but service charges paid for collecting UDF and passing it on to AAI., which cannot be said to be the income derived from operation of aircraft falling under Article 8 of the DTAA.
Lufthansa German Airlines Vs DCIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28714 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
Deposit of demonetised notes collected by the Assessee from its members would not be hit by Section 68.
Bhageeratha Pattina Sahakara Sangha Niyamitha Vs ITO
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28713 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 68
-
The TDS mechanism will fail when the payees are not identifiable, however it is the responsibility of the Assessee to prove that payees are not identifiable with credible reasons, failing which Revenue would be entitled to raise demand under Section 201(1)/(1A).
BIOCON LTD Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28712 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 40(a)(i)/(ia)
-
Since the proposed reopening was issued after the expiry of four years, Revenue has to show that there was fault on Assessee’s part to truly and fully disclose material facts required for assessment.
Hanwant Manbir Singh Vs Deputy Commisioner of Income Tax
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28706 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
Furnishing of form No. 67 before due date of return is not a mandatory requirement.
42 Hertz Software India Pvt. Ltd. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28705 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
-
Non-jurisdictional HC rulings do not bind ITAT on law in all the situations, particularly when Explanation below Section 149(3) was not considered by Delhi HC which has explicitly been relied upon by the Revenue in the present case.
Mitali R. Lakhanpal Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28704 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Since there was not an iota of doubt that the material being referred by the AO for making the addition was not found and seized during search, jurisdiction assumed by the AO is invalid.
Luxora Infrastructure Vs DCIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28703 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
No rental income can be said to have accrued to the Assessee from unsold flats either as stock in trade or under income from house property.
KD Construction unit I Vs ITO
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28702 (ITAT-PUNE) · Section 23(5)
-
Since, the annual value determined is devoid of any rational endorsement, we hereby delete the addition made by the revenue authorities.
Sunil Kumar Vs ACIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28701 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
The Revenue failed to make detailed enquiries as to the fair market rates and has not made any comparables with regard to prevailing market rate
Zee Fabrics Inc. Vs ACIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28700 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Linking the claim of depreciation to production in the midst of manufacture progression is against the legislative intent.
The Fertilizer Corporation of India Ltd Vs Addl. CIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28699 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
There is nothing to question the bonafides of the AO or to elaborate as to what should constitute appropriate evidence.
Reliance Payment Solutions Limited Vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-8
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28698 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 263
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.