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

15,882 rulings

  1. Bombay High Court · 31 Jul 2018
    S. 148/ 151: If the AO reopens the assessment by obtaining the sanction of the Commissioner of Income Tax instead of the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, there is a breach of section 151 which renders the reopening void

    CIT. vs. Aquatic Remedies Pvt. Ltd.

    (2018) TaxCorp(LJ) 15442 (HC-BOMBAY) · Sections. 148, 151

  2. ITAT Kolkata · 28 Jul 2018
    Bogus Capital Gains From Penny Stocks: In order to treat the capital gains from penny stocks as bogus, the Dept has to show that there is a scam and that the assessee is part of the scam. The chain of events and the live link of the assesee's action giving her involvement in the scam should be established. The Dept cannot rely on alleged modus operandi & human behavior and disregard the evidence produced by the assessee. All imp judgements referred

    Navneet Agarwal vs. ITO

    (2018) TaxCorp(LJ) 15435 (ITAT-KOLKATA)

  3. Bombay High Court · 28 Jul 2018
    S. 260A: We are pained at this attitude on the part of the State to obtain orders of admission on pure questions of law by not pointing out that an identical question was considered by this Court earlier and dismissed by speaking order. Revenue has not carried out the assurance which was made earlier. Revenue should give proper explanation why assurance given earlier is not being followed. It is time responsibility is fixed and the casual approach of the Revenue in prosecuting its appeals is stopped

    PCIT. vs. Starflex Sealing India Pvt. Ltd.

    (2018) TaxCorp(LJ) 15434 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section. 260A

  4. ITAT Jaipur · 28 Jul 2018
    S. 50C/ 54F: If the assessee has invested the entire sale consideration in new house property, the capital gains are exempt u/s 54F. The AO cannot apply s. 50C and treat the stamp duty valuation as the consideration and assess the difference between the stamp duty valuation and the actual valuation to capital gains (All judgements considered)

    ITO. Vs. Raj Kumar Parashar

    (2018) TaxCorp(LJ) 15433 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · Sections. 50C, 54F

  5. Supreme Court · 28 Jul 2018
    S. 220(6): CBDT's OMs dated 29.02.2016 & 31.07.2017 by which AO's have been directed to grant stay of disputed demand on payment of 20%/ 15% does not fetter the power of the AO & CIT to grant stay on payment of amounts lesser than 15%/ 20%. The AO/ CIT have to deal with the prima facie merits and give reasons for rejection of the stay application

    PCIT vs. LG Electronics India Pvt. Ltd.

    (2018) TaxCorp(LJ) 15424 (SC) · Section. 220(6)

  6. Supreme Court · 25 Jul 2018
    SC - Administrative Circular of the CBDT will not operate as a 'fetter' on the Commissioner, since it is a quasi judicial authority to grant lesser deposit relief.

    LG Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. Pr. CIT

    (2018) TaxCorp(LJ) 15413 (SC)

  7. ITAT Delhi · 21 Jul 2018
    S. 32: Goodwill is an intangible asset. It falls under the expression "any other business or commercial rights of similar nature" and is eligible for depreciation u/s 32(1)(ii) of the Act. The question whether when a firm has been succeeded by a company and net assets of the firm have vested in the company, there is any transfer of goodwill in the real sense and whether the valuation of goodwill done by the assessee is erroneous has to be decided by the Division Bench

    CLC & Sons Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT

    (2018) TaxCorp(LJ) 15407 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section. 32

  8. ITAT Hyderabad · 14 Jul 2018
    S. 2(1A) Agricultural income: Mushroom is not a ‘vegetable’, ‘plant’, 'fruit' or ‘animal’ but is a ‘fungus’. Anything which is produced by performing basic operations on the soil is an "agricultural product" and the income therefrom is "agricultural income". The nature of the product and the fact that it is not a ‘plant’, ‘flower’, ‘vegetable’ or ‘fruit’ is irrelevant. The only relevant aspect is whether the production is by performing some basic operations on the soil (All judgements considered)

    DCIT vs. Inventaa Industries Private Limited

    (2018) TaxCorp(LJ) 15406 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · Section. 2(1A)

  9. ITAT Mumbai · 18 Jul 2018
    S. 269SS/ 271D Penalty: It is not enough for the assessee to show that the transaction of taking loan/ deposit by cash is genuine or bona fide. It has also to be shown that there was reasonable cause u/s 273B for the assessee being unable to take the loan/deposit by account payee cheque or account payee bank draft

    Deepak Sales & Properties Pvt. Ltd vs. ACIT

    (2018) TaxCorp(LJ) 15400 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Sections 269SS, 271D

  10. Bombay High Court · 19 Jul 2018
    S. 147/148: If the recorded reasons do not specify, prima-facie, the quantum of tax which has escaped assessment but merely state that it would be at least Rs.1,00,000, and if the reopening is to "verify" suspicious transactions, prima-facie, the reasons do not indicate reasonable belief of the AO and the notice is without jurisdiction

    Dulraj U. Jain vs. ACIT

    (2018) TaxCorp(LJ) 15399 (HC-BOMBAY) · Sections 147, 148

  11. Bombay High Court · 19 Jul 2018
    S. 158BC: The fact that the second proviso to s. 158BC(a) prohibits an assessee who is subjected to search from filing a revised return of income does not mean that the assessee is prohibited from raising an additional claim before the appellate authorities

    Alok Textile Industries Ltd vs. DCIT

    (2018) TaxCorp(LJ) 15398 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 158BC

  12. ITAT Delhi · 18 Jul 2018
    S. 147/ 143(2): If the notice u/s 143(2) is issued prior to the furnishing of return by the assessee in response to notice u/s 148, the notice issued u/s 143(2) is not valid and the reassessment framed on the basis of said notice has to be quashed. S. 292BB does not save the assessment (All judgements considered)

    Halcrow Group Ltd vs. ADIT

    (2018) TaxCorp(LJ) 15390 (ITAT-DELHI) · Sections 147, 143(2)

  13. Supreme Court · 18 Jul 2018
    ITAT Appointment Rules: Persons selected as Member of the ITAT will continue till the age of 62 years and the person holding the post of President, shall continue till the age of 65 years

    Kudrat Sandhu vs. UOI

    (2018) TaxCorp(LJ) 15389 (SC)

  14. Supreme Court · 10 Jul 2018
    S. 194-I TDS: Amounts paid as part of the lease premium or biannual or annual payments for a limited/specific period towards acquisition of lease hold rights are not subject to TDS, being capital payments. Amounts constituting annual lease rent, expressed in terms of percentage (e.g. 1%) of the total premium for the duration of the lease, are rent and subject to TDS

    New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (NOIDA) vs. ACIT

    (2018) TaxCorp(LJ) 15368 (SC) · Section. 194-I

  15. ITAT Mumbai · 09 Jul 2018
    S. 68 HSBC Black Money: The suspicion of the AO that the deposits in the foreign bank account have Indian origin is not unfounded because the assessee used his Indian passport to open the a/c. The intent of the assessee is not above board. Matter requires investigation because the narrations in the bank accounts do not give any clue that these amounts originate from India

    DCIT. vs. Rahul Rajnikant Parikh

    (2018) TaxCorp(LJ) 15367 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section. 68

  16. Supreme Court · 10 Jul 2018
    S. 194A TDS: Meaning of the expression "corporation" explained. Difference between "established by an Act" and "established under an Act" explained. Important principles of interpretation of fiscal statutes explained. Though NOIDA is not a "local authority", it is a "corporation established by the Act" and so payments to it are not liable to TDS u/s 194A

    CIT (TDS) vs. Canara Bank

    (2018) TaxCorp(LJ) 15366 (SC) · Section. 194A

  17. ITAT Agra · 10 Jul 2018
    S. 147/148: If there is nothing in the recorded reasons to suggest that the income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment is Rs. one lakh or more, the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act beyond four years of the end of the relevant assessment year is invalid

    Usha Agarwal vs. ITO

    (2018) TaxCorp(LJ) 15365 (ITAT-AGRA) · Sections. 147, 148

  18. Kerala High Court · 13 Jul 2018
    HC - No deduction to employer for belated payment of employees' contribution to PF/ESI beyond the respective Act due-date.

    Popular Vehicles & Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT

    (2018) TaxCorp(LJ) 15364 (HC-KERALA)

  19. ITAT Mumbai · 13 Jul 2018
    ITAT - Sec. 79 restriction on loss set-off and carry forward would apply in case of stake sale in closely-held company to widely-held company.

    Edelweiss Commodities Services Ltd. Vs. ITO

    (2018) TaxCorp(LJ) 15363 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section. 79

  20. ITAT Mumbai · 09 Jul 2018
    S. 68 HSBC Black Money: The assessee being non-resident is not liable to tax in respect of money lying in the foreign country unless the AO bring something on record to show that assessee has not fulfilled the test of taxability of non-resident under the provisions of the Act

    DCIT. vs. Dipendu Bapalal Shah

    (2018) TaxCorp(LJ) 15356 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 68

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.