-
Expenses incurred for promotion of pharmaceutical products in the form of gifts or incentives (freebies) to the doctors are against public policy and being prohibited by law and same are not allowable under Section 37(1).
Galderma India Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly known as Nestle Skin Health India Pvt. Ltd.) Vs ACIT
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31309 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Reassessment in the name of non-existent company, despite the Revenue being diligently informed about the scheme of amalgamation, is invalid and liable to be quashed.
Sterlite Technologies Limited Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income tax
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31308 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
The reassessment proceedings could not have been initiated in the relevant AY, since the payments for the flat were made in earlier AYs, and no part of the transaction took place in the relevant AY.
Sanjay Kumar Vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31307 (HC-DELHI) · Section 148
-
For the purpose of prosecution, the proceedings have to be initiated under Section 279 and usually the notice has to be served on the person concerned.
Manoj Vasudev Pardasany Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31306 (HC-DELHI)
-
The difference of heads under which the income was disclosed in the present case and in the coordinate bench case would not be of any material consequence in view of the final finding on the issue.
Suman Paper & Boards Ltd Vs JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & 2
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31305 (HC-GUJARAT)
-
In the present case, AO erred in allowing deduction and caused loss of tax to the Revenue, thus, HC committed a very serious error in setting aside the revisionary order.
Paville Project Pvt. Ltd Vs The Commissioner of Income Tax 7
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31292 (SC)
-
The statute must be read as a whole and one provision of the Act should be construed with reference to other provisions in the same Act so as to make a consistent enactment of the whole statute.
Vikram Sujitkumar Bhatia & Others Vs Income Tax Officer
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31291 (SC) · Section 153C
-
As Assessee does not have a permanent establishment in India, the article 7 of the treaty will trigger only if such profits are attributable to a permanent establishment in India.
Taj TV Limited Vs DCIT
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31288 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Several notices were issued under Section 142(1) seeking details of deposits made by account holders, however no reference was made to any material or document seized in the course of search in any of the notices.
Renukamat Multi State Coop Urban Credit Soc. Ltd Vs ACIT
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31287 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
HC - Delhi HC Directs Revenue to Dispose of Assessee's Objections Against Section 153C Notices; Provided important guidelines for the handling of objections against Section 153C.
Kamal Nath Vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31280 (HC-DELHI) · Section 153C
-
Since both the conditions for classification as financial liability failed, the instruments cannot be classified as financial liability and thus, in turn cannot be termed as CFI in absence of the financial liability component.
Reliance Industrial Investment and Holdings Limited Vs DCIT
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31274 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
All the transactions of the Assessee with its associated enterprise for purchase of online advertisement space has been held to be at arm’s length and therefore, no further profits could be attributed.
Google India Private Ltd Vs The Additional Commissioner of Income Tax
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31273 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
-
The question of law framed in the instant appeals is squarely covered.
Google India Pvt Ltd Vs THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31272 (HC-KARNATAKA)
-
Bombay HC is directed to consider the matter afresh in accordance with law and on merits and consider the effect of the omission of Section 144B(9) of the Act.
Mantra Industries Limited Vs NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE (FORMERLY KNOWN AS NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE) & ORS.
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31271 (SC) · Section 144B(9)
-
Once the assessees herein are held to be not liable to deduct the tax at source at all merely because subsequently the foreign company VOAMC is held liable to be taxed in India, the assessees herein cannot be treated as assessees in default.
Van Oord Acz India Pvt. Ltd Vs COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VI
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31270 (SC) · Section 40(a)(i)
-
As per provisions of Section 115A(i)(a)(ii), interest income earned by the assessee would be chargeable to tax at 20%.
Cooperative Rabobank UA Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31269 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
The dates of the transactions in regard to the Benami properties was indeed before coming into force the 2016 Amendment Act.
Parvesh Construction Pvt. Ltd. & ors Vs Union of India & ors.
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31268 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
ITAT - Mumbai ITAT Quashes Assessment Order for Non-Conformity with DRP's Finding on Type of PE; Emphasizes Need for 'Complete Conformity' Under Section 144C.
AZZ WSI B.V. Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31267 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Payment for Supervision, Installation, and Commissioning Services Not FTS under India-Belgium DTAA; Invokes MFN Clause under India-Portugal DTAA, Deletes Disallowance under Section 40(a)(i).
Dieffenbacher GmbH Vs The ACIT
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31265 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
ITAT - While the CIT has the power to consider fresh issues during proceedings under Section 263, a fresh show cause notice must be issued to the Assessee, presenting the new issues for their response.
Samsung C & T Corporation Vs CIT (1nternational Taxation)-3
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31264 (ITAT-DELHI)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.