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

15,829 rulings

  1. Delhi High Court · 02 Oct 2021
    Section 260A(1) allows appeal against ITAT’s order only on a question of law which must be debatable and not previously settled.

    Bhadani Financiers Pvt. Ltd Vs PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

    (2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27365 (HC-DELHI) · Section 260A

  2. ITAT Pune · 02 Oct 2021
    ITAT - In absence of PE in India, software license-fee not taxable as business profits and also not taxable as Royalty.

    Husco International Inc. Vs ACIT (IT)

    (2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27364 (ITAT-PUNE)

  3. Gujarat High Court · 02 Oct 2021
    HC - Since ITAT has condoned the delay in filing appeal by a speaking order, HC sets aside rejection of Assessee’s application under VsV Act.

    Maheshbhai Shantilal Patel Vs THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL

    (2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27363 (HC-GUJARAT)

  4. Delhi High Court · 06 Aug 2021
    HC - Para 4(B) of CBDT Office Memorandum dt. Feb 29, 2016 is mandatory in nature and Revenue has to give reasons for pre-deposit of more than 20% demand.

    Eko India Financial Services Private Limited Vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

    (2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27335 (HC-DELHI)

  5. ITAT Delhi · 06 Aug 2021
    ITAT - Ground-rent does not come under any of the items mentioned in various clauses of section 43B. So, no disallowance on account of damages demanded by L&DO for misuse of the premises could be made even under section 43B.

    Ajay Enterprises Pvt. Ltd Vs DCIT

    (2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27334 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 43B

  6. ITAT Hyderabad · 06 Aug 2021
    ITAT - Claim for set-off of interest expenditure on borrowed funds against income from investment of borrowed funds allowed.

    Hinduja National Power Corporation Limited Vs DCIT

    (2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27333 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)

  7. ITAT Mumbai · 06 Aug 2021
    ITAT - Amendment in section 50C being curative in nature was applicable retrospectively - 50C is not applicable in cases where the difference between the market value and agreement value is below 10%.

    Shaista Irphan Mogul Vs ACIT

    (2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27332 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 56(2)(vii)(b)

  8. ITAT Kolkata · 06 Aug 2021
    ITAT - No disallowance for delayed contribution of employees’ contribution beyond the due date under respective acts, but before the due date of filing return as amendment to Sec.43B by Finance Act 2021 is prospective in application.

    Harendra Nath Biswas Vs DCIT

    (2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27331 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · Section 43B

  9. ITAT Bangalore · 27 Sep 2021
    ITAT - Upholds capitalization of pre-commencement expenditure in accordance with principles enshrined in AS-10 and also under ICDS-V.

    Waterline Hotels Pvt. Ltd Vs DCIT

    (2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27330 (ITAT-BANGALORE)

  10. ITAT Pune · 27 Sep 2021
    ITAT - The waiver of loan in the earlier year has no impact either on the actual cost u/s 43(1) or the w.d.v. u/s 43(6) for the year under consideration. Depreciation has to be allowed on the w.d.v. of the block of Machinery at the gross value without reducing the waiver of loan therefrom.

    Shapers India Private Limited Vs DCIT

    (2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27329 (ITAT-PUNE)

  11. ITAT Mumbai · 10 Aug 2021
    ITAT - Reasons recorded for reopening the assessment should be clear and unambiguous and the reasons recorded should be self- explanatory and while examining the validity of reopening of the assessment it was not open to go beyond the reasons recorded by the Revenue and thus, reasons are to examined on standalone basis.

    Life Insurance Corporation Of India Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 1(2)(1)

    (2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27327 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 147

  12. ITAT Patna · 22 Sep 2021
    Amount of incentive received specifically for the purchase of van was not in the nature of any benefit or perquisite which had arisen from business so as to treat the value of the same as business income of the assessee in terms of Section 28(iv) - Case of the assessee is covered by Explanation 10 to Section 43(1) of the Act.

    MOTOR MACHINERY TOOLS VERSUS ACIT, CIRCLE-5 PATNA

    (2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27278 (ITAT-PATNA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=92025&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  13. ITAT Chennai · 22 Sep 2021
    Where no revisional order was passed by CIT at the time of completion of original assessment, limitation period for passing order u/s.263 had to commence from first order of assessment.

    M/S. SEYAD SHARIAT FINANCE LTD. VERSUS THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-2, CHENNAI.

    (2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27277 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=92027&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  14. ITAT Chennai · 22 Sep 2021
    As long as an exempt income was earned, the expenditure incurred as attributable to earning such exempt income, had to be disallowed under section 14A. Assessing Officer is directed to consider only those investments for computing average value of investment which yielded exempt income during the year under consideration as per Rule 8D(2)(iii).

    M/S. CHETTINAD BUILDERS P. LTD. [NOW MERGED WITH M/S. CHETTINAD PRODUCTS AND SERVICES P. LTD.] VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1 (2), CHENNAI.

    (2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27276 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=92028&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  15. ITAT Mumbai · 22 Sep 2021
    The Assessing Officer cannot disregard a transaction just because it results in a tax advantage to the assessee. Just as much as we cannot legitimize and glorify tax evasion through colourable devices and tax shelters, we cannot also deprecate and disapprove genuine tax planning within the framework of law. The line of demarcation between what is permissible tax planning and what turns into impermissible tax avoidance may be somewhat thin, but that cannot be excuse enough for the tax authorities to err on the side of excessive caution.

    MICHAEL E DESA VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER INTERNATIONAL TAXATION WARD 1 (1) , MUMBAI

    (2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27275 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=92030&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  16. ITAT Amritsar · 16 Aug 2021
    ITAT - Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC) eligible for registration u/s 80G.

    Shirmoni Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee Vs CIT – I

    (2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27262 (ITAT-AMRITSAR) · Section 80G

  17. Supreme Court · 16 Aug 2021
    SC - Amendment in Gratuity Act prospective - Enhanced ceiling under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (Gratuity Act) applies from May 24, 2010 and not from Jan 1, 2007.

    Krishna Gopal Tiwary & Anr Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS

    (2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27261 (SC) · Section 10(10)

  18. ITAT Delhi · 20 Aug 2021
    ITAT - Amount of loan not taxable u/s 2(22)(e) simply because lender and recipient companies’ had common substantial shareholding.

    Vardhaman Buildtech Pvt. Ltd Vs ACIT

    (2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27220 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 2(22)(e)

  19. Karnataka High Court · 16 Sep 2021
    For the purposes of computing tax payable on the royalty income received, it has to be taxed with reference to the provisions of the agreement (Indo-US DTAA).

    THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE -1 (2), BENGALURLU VERSUS M/S IBM WORLD TRADE CORPORATION

    (2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27214 (HC-KARNATKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=85549&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip

  20. Madras High Court · 16 Sep 2021
    Asssessee has paid the penalty amount, immediately after receipt of the show cause notice, therefore CIT, without taking note of the payment of the above said amount and pendency of the appeal proceedings before this High Court, has erroneously launched criminal prosecution against the petitioner for wilful commission of concealment of income to avoid payment of tax, under Section 276(c)(1).

    MR. SIVAKUMAR RAGAVAN DIRECTOR - M/S SOLAR PAPER MILLS LIMITED VERSUS THE STATE REP. BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 6 (2), CHENNAI

    (2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27213 (HC-MADRAS) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=85550&Category=Judgment&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.