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

15,867 rulings

  1. P&H High Court · 23 Aug 2019
    Departement's appeals is dismissed citing low tax effect and applies CBDT's recent circular which had enhanced the monetary limits for filing Departmental appeals before HC to Rs. 1 cr.

    Jai Bhole Steel Tubes (P) Ltd Vs The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19925 (HC-P&H)

  2. Delhi High Court · 23 Aug 2019
    While it is true that the demand u/s. 115- QA would be in addition to the total income, the fact of the matter is that in the present case it forms an integral part of the impugned assessment order u/s. 143 (3) of the Act it is not possible for this Court to read this part of the order separate from the rest of the assessment order.

    GENPACT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR.

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19924 (HC-DELHI)

  3. Gujarat High Court · 23 Aug 2019
    The phrase order giving rise to a demand in Rule 68B to the Second Schedule of the Act should be read as the assessment order under Section 143(3) of the Act and not merely an acknowledgment or an intimation under Section 143(1) of the Act.

    Gauravbhai Hargovindhai Dave Vs TAX RECOVERY OFFICER 4

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19923 (HC-GUJARAT) · Section 143(1)

  4. ITAT Mumbai · 23 Aug 2019
    It defies cannon of all commercial logic and expediency that all these supplier parties are supplying material without seeking their payments from the assessee as not even a single payment has been made by the assessee to all these aforesaid suppliers till the end of the previous year.

    M/s. Western Imaginary Transcon Private Ltd. ITO

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19922 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  5. ITAT Chennai · 23 Aug 2019
    Since the tenant in this case happened to be the subsidiary/joint venture company incurring persistent losses and the rent was waived, so it cannot be reason not to tax the amount due from tenant. Therefore, the rent payable by the tenant by waiver would amount to application of income and it cannot be construed as overriding title.

    M/s CRP (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19921 (ITAT-CHENNAI)

  6. ITAT Mumbai · 23 Aug 2019
    Assessee is entitled to the deduction of profits made during the sick period in terms of the provisions of section 115JB(vii).

    Rama Pulp and Papers Ltd Vs ACIT

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19920 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  7. ITAT Mumbai · 23 Aug 2019
    In order to claim exemption w.r.t gift ingredients to be satisfied: (a) Transfer, (b) No consideration, (c) Voluntary action and (d) acceptance by donee, further in case of gift of immovable property execution of gift deed is required, failing which gift would not be treated as valid gift under law.

    Shri Bonifacio D’souza Vs ITO

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19919 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  8. ITAT Delhi · 23 Aug 2019
    The debenture cannot be treated as a capital asset of the issuer company because it is a kind of debt instrument. It is a capital asset in the hands of the person subscribing to the debenture or the allottee of the debenture.

    R.S. Triveni Foods P. Ltd Vs Addl. CIT

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19918 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 56(2)(ix)

  9. ITAT Mumbai · 23 Aug 2019
    In the absence of any corroborative or circumstantial evidence to lend any credence to the contents of the loose paper, no addition can be made on mere presumption, guess-work or conjectures.

    Shri Salman Khan Vs ACIT

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19917 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  10. ITAT Agra · 23 Aug 2019
    Even if we assume the shares held by the assessee were benami then it would fall within the definition of Benami Property as defined under Section 2(8) of the Benami Transaction (Prohibition ) Act 1988 and considering the provisions of the Benami law, the benami property held by the assessee cannot be recovered/ claimed back and cannot be transferred by way of suit, claim or action to enforce the benami property, hence assessee would not be entitled to transfer the LTCG in the hands of Shri R C Garg.

    Shyam Sunder & Manish Taori C/o Shyam Sunder Bhattad Vs ACIT

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19916 (ITAT-AGRA)

  11. ITAT Mumbai · 23 Aug 2019
    It is well known that there are several reasons for difference in income between Form 26AS and books of accounts such as disparity of accounting policy, misquoting of PAN, etc on which the assessee does not have any control and asking the assessee to do the impossible is unwarranted.

    TUV India Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19915 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  12. ITAT Jaipur · 23 Aug 2019
    The initiation of proceedings u/s 148 is not sustainable in law and the same is quashed.

    SHRAVAN CHOUDHARY VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR.

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19914 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77130&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  13. ITAT Delhi · 23 Aug 2019
    There is no dispute with regard to purchase and import of mobile phones by the assessee from China. The major portion of the imported mobile phones was sold when the goods were in transit by way of high sea sales.

    M/S SINGHAL EXIM PVT. LTD. VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-23 (4) , C.R. BUILDING, NEW DELHI.

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19913 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77126&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  14. ITAT Jaipur · 23 Aug 2019
    The contention of the DR is not acceptable on the ground that the amount of capital gain can be invested in purchase of land only on receipt of the sale consideration and the intention of the legislature is that the amount of sale consideration should not be utilized otherwise other than purchase of agriculture land and in the instant case the assessee has invested the wholesale consideration in purchase of another agriculture land within two days which is clear from the bank statement of the assessee.

    BIRMA DEVI VERSUS I.T.O., WARD 6 (2), JAIPUR.

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19912 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77125&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  15. ITAT Mumbai · 23 Aug 2019
    The AO is at liberty to bring to tax the amounts in their respective hands of the investors if their identity, genuineness and creditworthiness is not proved.

    ACIT CIR 23 (1) , MUMBAI VERSUS M/S CALVIN PROPERTIES

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19911 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77123&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  16. ITAT Mumbai · 23 Aug 2019
    As in Assessment Year 2008-09 as well as in Assessment Year 2009-10, the assessing authority itself accepted the stand of the assessee that the Executive search fee was not taxable in India.

    SPENCER STUART INTERNATIONAL BV VERSUS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) , 4 (2) (2), MUMBAI

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19910 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77121&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  17. ITAT Bangalore · 23 Aug 2019
    Delay in filling the appeal is not deliberate or wanton, but due to bona fide circumstances set out above. We therefore condone the delay in filing the appeals.

    M/S EMBASSY CHARITABLE TRUST VERSUS THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), BANGALORE.

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19909 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77117&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  18. ITAT Delhi · 22 Aug 2019
    When assessee has taken the advance against consultancy services and not for investment in mutual funds nor any interest has been paid, there is no question of any direct nexus between exchange fluctuation loss claimed by the assessee with the exempt income earned during the years under assessment.

    Theolia Wind Power Pvt. Ltd Vs ACIT

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19908 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 14A

  19. ITAT Mumbai · 22 Aug 2019
    Assessee's intention was to expand its activity in overseas market. Hence, subsidiary was only a method by which the assessee was going to spend US$ 1 million for the purpose of its business.

    Zoom Entertainment Network Limited Vs ACIT

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19907 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  20. ITAT Pune · 22 Aug 2019
    Tribunal in its order passed in quantum proceedings, it can be seen that the assessee computed the ALP of the international transaction as per the manner prescribed in the section.

    DCIT, CIRCLE-8, PUNE VERSUS ATLAS COPCO (INDIA) LIMITED, MUMBAI-PUNE ROAD

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19906 (ITAT-PUNE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77098&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.