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

15,835 rulings

  1. ITAT Delhi · 04 Dec 2020
    The interest awarded to landowners u/s 28 of the Act on enhanced compensation is still a part of compensation and is a capital receipt taxable under the head capital gains.

    Ram Kishan Vs ITO

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24721 (ITAT-DELHI)

  2. ITAT Mumbai · 04 Dec 2020
    The assessee has no right to sell any unit, the godown right was embedded in the cost of the units developed which were sold by SNCML. Section 45(2) which relates to capital gain arising out of conversion of capital asset into stock-in- trade requires that in order to be chargeable to tax, there has to be a transfer u/s 2(47) of the Act and capital gain shall be brought to tax in the year in which the stock-in-trade has been sold.

    ITO Vs M/s Kidderpore Holdings Ltd.

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24719 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  3. ITAT Mumbai · 03 Dec 2020
    We see no need to address the broader issue of whether or not tax is deductible from the payments made by the assessee to Facebook Ireland Limited for the advertisements placed on Facebook, and whether or not income embedded in such payments in taxable in India.

    Interactive Avenues Private Limited Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24718 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  4. Bombay High Court · 02 Dec 2020
    On a plain reading of clause (c) of Section 80IB(10) of the IT Act, it is evident that the same does not exclude the principle of proportionality in any manner.

    M/s. Models Construction Pvt. Ltd. Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24711 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 80IB(10)

  5. ITAT Jaipur · 02 Dec 2020
    In the instant case, the Revenue failed to specify any defects in the recasted books and its addition of Rs. 50 Lac to the income, on the basis of possible leakage of revenues, is clearly ad hoc and cannot be legally sustained under Sec. 145(3).

    The DCIT Vs M/s Mojika Real Estate & Developers Pvt. Ltd.

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24710 (ITAT-JAIPUR)

  6. ITAT Visakhapatnam · 01 Dec 2020
    Revenue, on suspecting unaccounted cash receipts ought to have referred cost of construction to DVO and taxed the difference u/s 69C.

    DCIT Vs Paruchuru Satish Kumar (HUF)

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24703 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM) · Section 132(4)

  7. ITAT Delhi · 01 Dec 2020
    Explanation cannot defeat the intention and purpose of a section and as such the application of Explanation 3 will have to be in accordance with checks and balances which are applicable at the time of issuance of notice under section 148.

    INS Finance & Investment P. Ltd. Vs ITO

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24702 (ITAT-DELHI)

  8. Gujarat High Court · 30 Nov 2020
    Revenue passed a penalty order u/s 271(1)(c) and initiated criminal proceedings u/s 276C(2) on the demand arising out of CIT(A) order.

    HEMAL MANUBHAI PATEL Vs STATE OF GUJARAT

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24701 (HC-GUJARAT)

  9. ITAT Kolkata · 27 Nov 2020
    Assessee is directed to file before AO, the amount of dividend paid, copy of agreement and other relevant documents, as required by AO.

    DCIT Vs Reckitt Benckiser (I) Pvt. Ltd.

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24700 (ITAT-KOLKATA)

  10. Delhi High Court · 27 Nov 2020
    It is in the interest of justice to have a common trial for all three complaints.

    Paraminder Singh Kalra Vs The CIT

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24688 (HC-DELHI)

  11. Madras High Court · 27 Nov 2020
    It may not be necessary for this Court to decide the Substantial Questions of Law framed for consideration.

    M/s. Nannusamy Mohan(HUF) Vs The Assistant Commissioner Income Tax

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24686 (HC-MADRAS)

  12. ITAT Bangalore · 27 Nov 2020
    Cash basis for taxing FTS under India-Germany DTAA is permitted.

    M/s. ABB AG Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (International Taxation)

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24685 (ITAT-BANGALORE)

  13. ITAT Ahmedabad · 27 Nov 2020
    The primary onus lay upon the assessee to establish that the assessee does not hold the voting power beyond the stipulated threshold limit in the same proportion as equity shares for which burden was sought to be wrongly shifted upon the AO.

    Shri Tyrone Patrick Lemos Vs The Income Tax Officer

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24684 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · Section 151

  14. ITAT Indore · 25 Nov 2020
    It's the prerogative of the Revenue to cancel/ withdraw the registration granted by it u/s 12AA, if at anytime it finds that assessee engages in commercial activities and utilizes its funds for the purposes other than purpose as mentioned in the MOA.

    AIC-RNTU Foundation Vs CIT(Exemption)

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24683 (ITAT-INDORE) · Section 12AA

  15. ITAT Chennai · 25 Nov 2020
    Assessee did not deliberately concealed particulars of income or evade payment of taxes.

    M/s. Advent Computer Services Ltd. Vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24682 (ITAT-CHENNAI)

  16. ITAT Mumbai · 25 Nov 2020
    Pre-amendment provisions of Sec. 56(2)(vii)(b) would not be applicable to transactions where substantial obligations have been discharged prior to coming into effect of the amendment and only the registration was done post-amendment.

    Shri Siraj Ahmed Jamalbhai Bora Vs Income Tax Officer

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24681 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 56(2)(vii)(b)

  17. ITAT Mumbai · 27 Nov 2020
    The revenue is authorised to collect taxes in accordance with law as per Article 265 of the Constitution of India and not based on the consent or acceptance of the assessee either in the return or during the course of assessment or appellate proceedings.

    Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs M/s. Godrej Properties Limited

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24680 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  18. Karnataka High Court · 26 Nov 2020
    The expression expenditure will also include a loss and therefore, issuance of shares at a discount where the assessee absorbs the difference between the price at which it is issued and the market value of shares would also be expenditure incurred for the purposes of Sec.37(1).

    M/S BIOCON LTD. Vs The CIT, The DCIT

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24672 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Section 37

  19. Patna High Court · 26 Nov 2020
    HC - Writ dismissed against ITSC order - As a policy matter, Revenue is not to prolong litigations but bring finality, particularly when the amount of Revenue involved is not more than two crores.

    The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) Vs Income Tax Settlement Commission (IT & WT)

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24671 (HC-PATNA)

  20. ITAT Kolkata · 26 Nov 2020
    ITAT - When effect of excess purchase price had already been neutralized in the Profit & Loss A/c by way of enhancing the closing stock value of almost same value, no addition is called for.

    ITO, WARD-27 (2) , HALDIA VERSUS SHRI AJABULL KHAN

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24670 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=86831&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.