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

15,843 rulings

  1. ITAT Delhi · 24 Nov 2020
    Forced abandonment of property would not tantamount to transfer u/s 45 and even if it did result in transfer, section 45 provides that capital gains is chargeable in the year in which the transfer took place.

    Continental Construction Ltd Vs ACIT

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24657 (ITAT-DELHI)

  2. ITAT Delhi · 23 Nov 2020
    The maximum amount that the assessee can be directed to deposit would be 20% of the remaining demand.

    TATA TELESERVICES LIMITED Vs THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR.

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24646 (ITAT-DELHI)

  3. Karnataka High Court · 20 Nov 2020
    In the instant case AS-9 applies as financial service rendered by the assessee, which results in revenue, which in turn has to be taken into account having regard to incidence of costs relating to service.

    Medi Assist (India) Tpa Pvt. Ltd Vs CIT

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24641 (HC-KARNATKATA)

  4. Supreme Court · 20 Nov 2020
    Requirements of CBDT circular No.7/2016 are duly satisfied in the case of the assessee and hence, once the amount has been offered to tax by its members, the assessee could not be saddled with the liability to pay tax in respect of the same amount.

    THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5 Vs M/S BACKBONE PROJECTS LTD.

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24640 (SC)

  5. Karnataka High Court · 20 Nov 2020
    Irrespective of the nature of training expenses, assessee's business of transmitting data of qualified personnel, electronically, from its database would fall under human resource services as per CBDT notification making assessee eligible for deduction u/s Sec. 10A.

    NTT Data Global Advisory Services Pvt. Ltd Vs The CIT

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24639 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Section 10A

  6. ITAT Ahmedabad · 20 Nov 2020
    Question of possession of insider information is irrelevant short-term capital loss incurred with respect to the units which were purchased within a period of three months prior to the record date and sold within a period of nine months after such record date, shall be ignored to the extent of such loss, not exceeding the amount of dividend income for computing the income chargeable to tax.

    Yesha Electricals Pvt. Ltd. Vs Additional Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24638 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)

  7. ITAT Bangalore · 20 Nov 2020
    If the assessee files some application for correcting the return filed or making amends therein, it would not mean that he has filed a revised return. It will retain the character of the original return.

    M/s. TRC Engineering India Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24637 (ITAT-BANGALORE)

  8. ITAT Delhi · 20 Nov 2020
    The assessee was working in UK for more than 183 days which was never disputed by the Revenue at any point of time. Besides this the Revenue authorities are very well aware that the assessee has paid taxes in for the remuneration received in UK. The assessee is a resident of India. Therefore, Article 16(2) does not apply in the present scenario.

    Kapil Dev Ranwan Vs DCIT

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24636 (ITAT-DELHI)

  9. ITAT Bangalore · 20 Nov 2020
    As per CEC's report, compensatory payments are required to be made by the leaseholders for repairing the environmental depredation brought in due to illegal mining and overburden dumps beyond the sanctioned leased areas.

    M/s Ramgad Minerals & Mining Limited Vs ACIT

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24635 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 37

  10. Delhi High Court · 19 Nov 2020
    Revenue's response to assessee's stay application is prima facie non reasoned and shows non application of mind.

    ALCATEL LUCENT INTERNATIONAL Vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR.

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24624 (HC-DELHI)

  11. Madras High Court · 19 Nov 2020
    Charitable nature of the Trust would not be lost merely because the Trust profits from publishing newspapers.

    M/s.Thanthi Trust Vs The Director of Income Tax (Exemptions)

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24623 (HC-MADRAS)

  12. ITAT Ahmedabad · 18 Nov 2020
    It would be impracticable i.e. impossible for the assessee to discharge onus u/s 68 where no actual cash inflow happened.

    M/s. Rich Paints Ltd. Vs ITO-4(2)

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24616 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · Section 68

  13. ITAT Bangalore · 18 Nov 2020
    Once CIT(A) rejected application of sec.50C, he cannot rely on DVO report to hold that assessee adopted a colourable device to avoid tax.

    Smt. Sunita S Bathija Vs The Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24615 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 50C

  14. ITAT Mumbai · 17 Nov 2020
    Deduction u/s 10AA is to be given at the stage of computing the gross total income of the eligible undertaking under Chapter IV of the Act.

    Reliance Industries Ltd. Vs ACIT

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24614 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Sections 10AA, 37(1)

  15. ITAT Mumbai · 17 Nov 2020
    Where a partnership was dissolved, but the assessee either individually or along with some other partners continue to carry on the same business, the assessee was entitled to set off his share of unabsorbed loss from the firm against his business income from the A.Y. in question.

    Sh. Yerram Venkata Subba Vs ACIT

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24613 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  16. ITAT Mumbai · 17 Nov 2020
    Mobilization fee, as contended by Revenue, is an inextricable part of time charter service and since the consideration received on time charter services does not fall under the definition of royalty under the DTAA, mobilization fee received is also not taxable.

    Smit Singapore Pte Ltd. Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24612 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  17. ITAT Mumbai · 16 Nov 2020
    ITAT - Amount received by partner on retirement from the partnership firm does not amount to transfer, (as contemplated in section 2(47)) hence non taxable capital receipt.

    Dr. Vithal V. Kamat Vs Joint Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24611 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  18. ITAT Hyderabad · 13 Nov 2020
    ITAT - The whole transactions are to be understood in a holistic manner and cannot be construed as a colourable device or a sham transaction as admittedly there is no element of any income within the meaning of Section 2(24) of the Act in this entire gamut of transaction.

    Income Tax Officer Vs M/s. Shrilekha Business Consultancy Pvt. Ltd.

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24610 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)

  19. ITAT Ahmedabad · 12 Nov 2020
    The refund of salary by the assessee was not voluntary but was to comply with the legal requirements, therefore, the same cannot be considered as income assessable to tax.

    The Dy. CIT Vs Shri Rajamannar Thennati

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24609 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)

  20. ITAT Mumbai · 12 Nov 2020
    The initiation of re-assessment proceedings and subsequent framing of re- assessment order in the name of a non-existent entity is illegal and bad in law.

    M/s.Tata Chemicals Limited Vs Additional CIT 2(3) (1)

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24608 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

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.