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

15,928 rulings

  1. Delhi High Court · 20 Dec 2016
    HC - Writ Allowed - Even though no express time limitation is provided for in Sec. 201, show cause notice must be issued within a 'reasonable' time.

    Bharti Airtel Ltd. Vs. UOI AND ANR.

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11693 (HC-DELHI)

  2. P&H High Court · 20 Dec 2016
    HC - Not correct to hold that TDS u/s 194J was applicable on payment to contractors (EPC-contract) based on the level of human intervention of technical personnel involved, as against Sec. 194C.

    Bharat Heavy Electricals Vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11692 (HC-P&H) · Section. 194J

  3. Karnataka High Court · 20 Dec 2016
    HC - Writ Allowed - Word ‘shall’ used in Sec 245D(4A) suggests that the timeline is mandatory and not directory.

    RNS Infrastructure Limited vs. Income Tax Settlement Commissioner and others

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11691 (HC-KARNATAKA) · Section. 245D(4A)

  4. Bombay High Court · 21 Dec 2016
    HC - Where AO was satisfied with income attributable under article 9 of India-Denmark DTAA in respect of 141 ships out of 145 ships, then revenue could not bring income of remaining 4 ships to tax in India under section 9.

    Director of Income-tax (IT)-I, Mumbai v. A.P. Moller Maersk A/S

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11690 (HC-BOMBAY) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenINTL.aspx?ID=10900&Category=INTLDecisions&CategoryType=Zip

  5. Supreme Court · 21 Dec 2016
    HC - Where no agreement between two Jurisdictional Commissioners as required u/s 127 for transfer of case was shown by revenue, impugned order of transfer could not be upheld.

    Noorul Islam Educational Trust v. Commissioner of Income-tax-I

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11689 (SC) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=66626&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip

  6. ITAT Delhi · 21 Dec 2016
    ITAT - Before 1-10-2014, AO could not make a reference to valuation officer without rejecting books of account and relying on valuation officer's report addition could not be made under section 69.

    Westland Buildtech (P.) Ltd. v. Income-tax Officer, Ward- 18 (3), New Delhi

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11688 (ITAT-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=53583&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  7. ITAT Rajkot · 21 Dec 2016
    ITAT - Where labourers were supplied by sub-contractors and sub-contractors were paid in cash against self-made vouchers, the same to be disallowed as assessee was unable to point out as to how he had made all the payments in cash by way of self-made vouchers.

    Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Cir.2, Jungadh v. Jagabhai Bhayabhai Wagh

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11687 (ITAT-RAJKOT) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=53582&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  8. Bombay High Court · 21 Dec 2016
    HC - In respect of proceedings for recovery u/s 179, before the issue of interpretation of the word 'Tax due' can be decided, the factual aspect of the amount due on account of tax and interest from the defaulting company has to be ascertained.

    Nandkishor Kagliwal, Director M/s. Jeevan Investment & Finance Pvt. Ltd. Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 (2) (1) & Others

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11686 (HC-BOMBAY) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=67987&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip

  9. ITAT Mumbai · 21 Dec 2016
    ITAT - Even though assessee failed to furnish the information or documents u/s 92D yet assessee had made the sufficient compliance for maintaining the record as required u/s 92D r.w. Rule 10D and also there was no recommendation by the TPO for initiating any penalty proceeding u/s 271AA. Therefore, no penalty under section 271AA.

    Cadbury Schweppes Overseas Ltd. C/o Cadbury House Versus Assistant Director of Income Tax, (International Taxation) -1 (2), Mumbai

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11685 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenINTL.aspx?ID=10963&Category=INTLDecisions&CategoryType=Zip

  10. ITAT Kolkata · 20 Dec 2016
    ITAT - No addition on foreign exchange gain on restatement of liability as the same is contingent gain.

    DCIT, Circle-12, 3, Govt. Place (West), Kolkata-1 Versus Usha Martin Telematics Limited

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11684 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=53544&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  11. ITAT Nagpur · 20 Dec 2016
    ITAT - Four days time to submit details in such a case is not at all reasonable from any stretch of imagination. No penalty u/s 271(1)(b) for non attendance of the assessee.

    Shree Agrawal Oil Industries (P) Ltd. Versus Asstt. Commissioner of Income-tax, Nagpur

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11683 (ITAT-NAGPUR) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=53545&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  12. ITAT Bangalore · 20 Dec 2016
    ITAT - TDS u/s 192 is applicable on addition of payment/reimbursement of amount on account of salary, relocation and other related costs of expatriate employees.

    M/s. Intel Corporation, C/o Intel Technology India Pvt. Ltd. Versus Dy. Director of Income Tax, (International Taxation), Circle 1 (1), Bangalore.

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11682 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenINTL.aspx?ID=10906&Category=INTLDecisions&CategoryType=Zip

  13. ITAT Jaipur · 20 Dec 2016
    ITAT - Since it is a technical breach on the part of the assessee as the audit report could not be uploaded on account of site/ server problem of the system and also this is first time when assessee was required to e-file the audit report, No penalty u/s 271B.

    Smt. Raj Kumari Bafna, Prop. M/s. Kesharia Cotton Suppliers Versus The ITO, Ward- 1, Beawar

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11681 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=53552&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  14. P&H High Court · 20 Dec 2016
    HC - It is not that if a contract does not fall within the ambit of Section 194C, it must be deemed to fall within the ambit of Section 194J. Sections 194C and 194J are independent provisions.

    Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS-II, Chandigarh Versus The Senior Manager (Finance), Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd., Jhajjar.

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11680 (HC-P&H) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=67975&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip

  15. Supreme Court · 19 Dec 2016
    SC - No interest u/s 234B/C can be levied on employee for employer's TDS default.

    Ian Peter Morris vs. ACIT

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11679 (SC) · Section. 234B/C

  16. Supreme Court · 19 Dec 2016
    SC - Writ Dismissed - Taxpayer’s challenge to IDS-2 scheme (Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Yojna, 2016) dismissed.

    Siddharth Mehta Vs. Union Of India And Anr.

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11678 (SC)

  17. Karnataka High Court · 19 Dec 2016
    HC - Society held Govt. grant only as a custodian, therefore neither grant nor interest thereon could be held as income.

    Karnataka Municipal Data Society v. Income-tax Officer, Ward-9(2), Bangalore

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11677 (HC-KARNATAKA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=66647&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip

  18. Kerala High Court · 19 Dec 2016
    HC - Assessee was under severe financial crisis thus, he suffered losses and faced genuine hardship, delay in filing return to be condoned.

    M. Rajan v. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Calicut

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11676 (HC-KERALA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=66586&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip

  19. Gujarat High Court · 19 Dec 2016
    HC - Before making a reference to TPO, Assessing Officer failed to deal with objection as per Instruction No. 3/2016, issued by CBDT, reference to TPO set aside.

    Alpha Nipon Innovatives Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 1(1)(1)&1

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11675 (HC-GUJARAT) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=67974&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip

  20. ITAT Bangalore · 19 Dec 2016
    ITAT - Income in respect of sale of plots by a developer can be recognized only in the year in which conveyance deed executed is registered in favour of the buyers and development expenditure incurred is allowed as expenditure or the expenditure likely to be incurred on the plots sold as expenditure.

    S.K. Properties v. Income-tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Bangalore

    (2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11674 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=53541&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.