-
The invocation of Sec. 241A was without authority of law in absence of refund being determined u/s 143(1).
Tata Communications Limited Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20218 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 143(1), 241A
-
The SARFAESI Act merely provides a recovery mechanism and nothing else.
Perfect Thread Mills Ltd Vs DCIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20217 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
None of the services provided involved any element of imparting of knowhow nor was there a transfer of any knowledge, skill or experience to fall within the ambit of royalty.
Van Oord Dredging and Marine Vs Dy.CIT (International Taxation)
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20216 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
The delay in completion of the project was completely circumstantial and neither the assessee nor the builders had any mala-fide intentions for such delay, hence benefit of Sec.54F cannot be denied.
Lalitkumar Kesarimal Jain Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20215 (ITAT-PUNE) · Section 54F
-
No lay man can execute a deed of mortgage of his property against the loan availed by a third party/ parties, until and unless the individual has substantial interest over them.
T.S. Hajee Moosa & Co Vs The ACIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20210 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
-
Both Sec.195(1) & Sec.40(a)(ia) calls for TDS deduction where the sum is chargeable and in the absence of chargeability to tax under the act, provisions of Sec.40(a)(ia) cannot be invoked.
JLC Electromet Pvt Ltd Vs ACIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20209 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · Section 195
-
Being a chairman in a company does not amount to holding a substantial interest therein in terms of the clear mandate of Explanation 3 to section 13 of the Act.
J.R.D. Tata Trust Vs The ITO
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20203 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Sections 11, 13
-
S. 10(38) Bogus LTCG from Penny Stock: The analysis of balance sheet & P&L account of the Co shows that astronomical increase in share price which led to returns of 491% for assesee was completely unjustified. The EPS & other financials parameters cannot justify price at which assessee claims to have sold shares to obtain Long Terms Capital Gains. It is not explained as to why anyone would purchase said shares at such high price
Suman Poddar vs. ITO
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20196 (HC-DELHI) · Section 10(38)
-
A concession given by Counsel, if it is a concession in law and contrary to the statutory rules, is not binding on the litigant for the reason that there cannot be any estoppel against law (see also Himalayan Cooperative Group Housing Society Vs. Balwan Singh (2015) 7 SCC 373 Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd vs. Mahendra Prasad Jakhmola & V. Ramesh vs. ACIT (Madras High Court)
Directorate of Elementary Education vs. Pramod Kumar Sahoo
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20195 (SC)
-
A concession given by Counsel, if it is a concession in law and contrary to the statutory rules, is not binding on the litigant for the reason that there cannot be any estoppel against law (see also Himalayan Cooperative Group Housing Society Vs. Balwan Singh (2015) 7 SCC 373 Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd vs. Mahendra Prasad Jakhmola & V. Ramesh vs. ACIT (Madras High Court)
Directorate of Elementary Education vs. Pramod Kumar Sahoo
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20194 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
-
S. 143(3): If the case is selected for limited scrutiny of a specific issue, the AO has no jurisdiction to make additions or disallowances on other issues.
Vijay Kumar vs. ITO
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20193 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH) · Section 143(3)
-
The words 'as it thinks fit' used under Section 254(1) is of the widest amplitude.
Reham Foundation Kandhari Lane Lal Bagh Lucknow Vs Commissioner Of Income Tax Exemption U.P State Cons & Infra.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20192 (HC-ALLAHABAD) · Section 12AA
-
The amount of accumulated profit needs to be worked out on the date of such payment/advancement of loan.
Asian Business Connection Private Limited Vs DCIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20189 (ITAT-INDORE)
-
The assessee would be afforded adequate opportunity to explain his case before passing an order on objective appraisal of the evidence available.
Epson India Private Limited Vs The ACIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20176 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Section 148
-
There is no merit in the present appeal and no question arises for consideration. Hence, the petition stands dismissed.
Genpact India (Previously Known As Genpact Infrastructure (Kolkata) Pvt. Ltd Vs Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-4
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20175 (HC-DELHI)
-
Merely because in the later year, the Assessing Officer takes a different view on the basis of similar material, which may have been collected during such process, would not permit him to reopen the assessment.
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL Vs PRECILION HOLDINGS LIMITED
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20174 (SC)
-
While passing the penalty order u/s. 271(1)(c) of the act, the assessing officer has categorically stated that this being second default of concealment of particulars of same type of income therefore he was satisfied to impose maximum penalty @ 300% of the tax sought to be evaded. Regarding contention of the assessee that assessing officer has failed to specify charge whether penalty is being imposed for furnishing inaccurate particulars or concealment of income.
KISHORBHAI D IYAVA VERSUS THE ITO, WARD-2, NADIAD AHMEDABAD
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20145 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77927&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The first transaction pertaining to cash received by the assessee from his father we are satisfied with the explanation of the assessee that the assessee gave this amount to his father after withdrawing the same from his bank account towards purchase of land and due to cancellation of land deal, it was returned to the assessee by his father and same was deposited by the assessee to his bank account. As the land deal was under process and for acquisition of land and the intention of the assessee was to contribute and support his family.
GOURANG CHANDRA NAYAK VERSUS JCIT, RANGE-3, BHUBANESWAR
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20144 (ITAT-CUTTACK) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77978&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
There was no bar in granting registration to trust, even if the trust has both charitable as well as religious objects no error in the order passed by the Tribunal.
DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS, CHENNAI. VERSUS M/S. ALPHA INDIA FOUNDATION
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20143 (HC-MADRAS) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79976&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
We dispose of this petition with a direction to the respondents to provide to the petitioner within one week the reasons recorded for issuance of the impugned certificate fixing the rate of deduction of TDS at 4%. It shall be open to the petitioner to assail the said reasons in case the petitioner is aggrieved thereby.
JIANGDONG FITTINGS EQUIPMENT CO LTD VERSUS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ORS.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20142 (HC-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79981&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.