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. Delhi High Court · 15 Mar 2022
    No question of law arises and that the penalty imposed cannot be construed as erroneous and unwarranted.

    Jayanti Dalmia Vs DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28589 (HC-DELHI) · Section 142(1)

  2. ITAT Bangalore · 14 Mar 2022
    Mere rendering of services would not be taxable unless the person receiving the services is enabled to utilize such services on its own in the future without having recourse to the person providing the service.

    Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd Vs The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28588 (ITAT-BANGALORE)

  3. Delhi High Court · 14 Mar 2022
    Assessee has been following a consistent accounting policy of recognizing unearned revenue in each financial year, and offering it for tax as and when services are rendered and/or goods are sold.

    Ericsson India Private Limited Vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28587 (HC-DELHI) · Section 241A

  4. MP High Court · 14 Mar 2022
    Revenue has the power to make requisition for taking over possession or control of such assets from any officer or authority, if the said income or property is not duly disclosed.

    Jahar Singh Gurjar Vs The State of M.P. & Another

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28586 (HC-MP)

  5. Supreme Court · 14 Mar 2022
    Though the statute under which the Agra Development Authority has been constituted is the UP Urban Planning and Development Act 1973, the same principle which has been laid down in the judgment of this Court in Canara Bank (supra), would govern the present case.

    Union Bank of India Vs Additional Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28585 (SC)

  6. ITAT Delhi · 14 Mar 2022
    The case of the assessee is covered by second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) and hence the disallowance made cannot be sustained.

    BUDH SINGH GULAB SINGH VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-29 (8) NEW DELHI

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28584 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=96043&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  7. ITAT Mumbai · 14 Mar 2022
    Any excess expenditure incurred by trust/charitable institution in earlier assessment year would be allowed to be set off against income of subsequent years by invoking section 11 of the Act.

    M/S. NAVAJBHAI RATAN TATA TRUST VERSUS ADDL. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMP.) RANGE–II, (NOW ASSESSED BY THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE–17 (2) , MUMBAI)

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28583 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=96046&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  8. Supreme Court · 14 Mar 2022
    The High Court was not right and justified in disposing of the appeal with one paragraph order without discussing the issues which arose for consideration.

    PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) VERSUS M/S. MOTISONS ENTERTAINMENT INDIA PVT. LTD.

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28581 (SC) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=86760&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip

  9. Bombay High Court · 12 Mar 2022
    Assesse is directed to maintain USD 10 Mn under an Escrow account to meet any tax requirements likely to result from a Master Merger Agreement.

    Business Process Outsourcing, LLC Vs The Authority For Advance Rulings

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28580 (HC-BOMBAY)

  10. Delhi High Court · 12 Mar 2022
    No useful purpose would be served by giving Revenue an opportunity to file counter affidavit whereas Revenue will be liberty to take action in accordance with law in case of availability of any fresh material.

    KURZ INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Vs PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -5, NEW DELHI & ORS.

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28579 (HC-DELHI)

  11. Delhi High Court · 12 Mar 2022
    The payment for providing access to computer software does not amount to royalty.

    Gracemac Corporation Vs COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28578 (HC-DELHI)

  12. ITAT Delhi · 12 Mar 2022
    There was no iota of evidence or any material information which could remotely prove that Assessee received any money from CMF for any operations in India after AY 2011-12.

    Satya Prakash Gupta Vs DCIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28577 (ITAT-DELHI)

  13. ITAT Mumbai · 12 Mar 2022
    Nowhere it was mentioned that the funds received as consideration from sale of original asset must be utilized for the purchase of the new residential house and thus assessee is eligible for benefit under Section 54.

    Reji Easow Vs Income Tax Officer

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28576 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 54

  14. ITAT Mumbai · 12 Mar 2022
    CIT(A) was not justified in sustaining the addition for expenses not claimed as deduction.

    Breach Candy Swimming Bath Trust Vs DCIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28575 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  15. ITAT Delhi · 12 Mar 2022
    CIT(A)’s observation that assessee’s spouse had meagre income cannot be accepted since her sources for purchase of property were proved and were never doubted.

    Abhay Kumar Mittal Vs DCIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28574 (ITAT-DELHI)

  16. ITAT Delhi · 12 Mar 2022
    Registered shareholder is to be considered the beneficial owner of shares, unless such shares are held in the capacity of a nominee/agent/trustee of the real owner.

    WSP Consultants India Pvt. Ltd Vs ACIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28573 (ITAT-DELHI)

  17. ITAT Mumbai · 12 Mar 2022
    No addition can be made in respect of unabated assessments which have become final in absence of any incriminating material found during search.

    Vipul Suresh Kumar Modi Vs DCIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28572 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  18. ITAT Ahmedabad · 12 Mar 2022
    An ad hoc disallowance of 10% of the total expenses for failure to substantiate the claim in entirety with evidences in the impugned year is highly unjustified and a disallowance of ₹ 5 lacs would be justified.

    GUJARAT STATE LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED VERSUS DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GANDHINAGA

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28571 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=96010&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  19. ITAT Chandigarh · 12 Mar 2022
    Proper enquiries have not been conducted by the AO and the order thus passed is clearly erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue.

    ASHWANI MARWAH VERSUS PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SHIMLA

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28570 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=96011&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  20. ITAT Mumbai · 12 Mar 2022
    We do not find any infirmity in the order of the learned principal Commissioner of income tax in invoking jurisdiction u/s 263 of the income tax act.

    ICICI BANK LIMITED VERSUS THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-2 (3) (1) , MUMBAI

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28569 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=96016&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

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.