-
The word 'is received' under Section 153(3) cannot be construed to mean 'till it is received' as such interpretation would extend the limitation in perpetuity which contrary to intention of legislature.
Late Mr. Lakhpatrai Agarwal through L/H Sunil L. Agarwal Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31010 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 153(3)
-
There is a separate procedure prescribed in Section 144C for carrying out assessment of non-resident Indians, however, the said procedure has not been complied by the Revenue in the present case.
Gigy Antony Vs INCOME-TAX OFFICER
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31009 (HC-KERALA) · Section 144C
-
The Assessee cannot be denied the deduction towards application and accumulation of funds and the addition is liable to be deleted.
Mulki Sundar Ram Shetty Nagar Ayyappa Swamy Temple Trust Vs ITO
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31008 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
-
There is dissonance between the show cause notice under Section 148A(b) and order passed under Section 148A(d).
Sunita Sharma Vs ITO
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31007 (HC-DELHI) · Section 148A(d)
-
Where no limitation is prescribed on the payment to non-resident, the statutory authorities must initiate action within a reasonable time of 4 years.
Subex Technologies Limited Vs THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 31006 (HC-KARNATAKA)
-
The treaty benefit cannot be denied to the Assessee even if the domestic GAAR provisions are applied as the transaction took place prior to the cut off date of Apr 1, 2017 and the short term capital is less than the threshold of Rs.3 Cr.
Reverse Age Health Services Pte Ltd Vs DCIT
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 30999 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
At the whims and fancies of the principal Commissioner of income tax provisions of explanation (2) (a) of section 263 cannot be invoked, but should be invoked where the order is passed without making enquiries and verification, which should have been made by AO.
Bhuvneshwari Vyapaar Private Limited Vs PCIT
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 30998 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Undoubtedly the factum of willful default is well propelled and the complainant agency has succeeded in proving their case beyond reasonable doubt.
Hema Chetan Shah Vs Government of India
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 30997 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
The facts of the case are grossly insufficient for making out a prima facie case of an wilful attempt to evade tax or evade payment of tax under Section 276C.
Kali Pradip Chowdhuri & Ors Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 30990 (HC-CALCUTTA) · Section 11
-
It is impermissible for the Revenue to adopt percentage of completion method as against project completion method consistently followed by the Assessee which was undisputed in the prior and subsequent years' assessments.
Corporate Leisure & Property Development Private Limited Vs The DCIT
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 30983 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
-
The order denying condonation of delay was clear, cogent and passed with the approval and sanction of PCCIT after adherence to the principles of natural justice.
Puneet Rastogi Vs PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 30982 (SC)
-
The CBDT Circular referred to the MCI Regulations after its amendment in 2009 and, therefore, neither the Circular nor Regulation 6.8 incorporated w.e.f. Dec 14, 2009 would be applicable to the instant case pertaining to AY 2008-09.
ABBOTT INDIA LIMITED, (As successor of Solvay Pharma India Ltd.) Vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 30981 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
The impugned reassessment notices issued by the ACIT, Bhubaneshwar are without jurisdiction, since Assessee falls under the jurisdiction of CIT New Delhi and no order under Section 127 was passed to transfer jurisdiction over the Assessee from New Delhi to Bhubaneshwar.
Vedanta Resources Ltd Vs The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 30975 (HC-ORISSA) · Section 148
-
If the administrative order passes the aforesaid test, Writ Court would refuse to exercise its jurisdiction and if interfered, it would amount to converting the jurisdiction of the Writ Court to that of an appellate authority.
Kamal Nath Vs THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 30974 (HC-CALCUTTA)
-
IBM India cannot be held to be assessee-in-default under Section 201(1) as the payments made to IBM Philippines for payroll services were on account of business income and not taxable in India due to admitted absence of a PE in India.
IBM India Private Limited Vs THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 30973 (HC-KARNATAKA)
-
The assessment order to be a nullity for being in contradiction of the provisions of Section 144C(10) and 144C(13).
Oxbow Energy Solutions LLC Vs DCIT
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 30972 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
Income which is already taxed in the hands of the firm is not taxable in the hands of the partner.
Mulberry Textiles LLP Vs ITO
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 30965 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 10(2A)
-
Section 144C(1) does not apply in case of change in tax rate unless there is a variation in returned income of Assessee.
Erisse Investments Ltd Vs ACIT
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 30964 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Appellate authority is directed to exclude the period from the date of filing of writ petition till the date of passing of this order, while calculating the period of limitation for filing an appeal.
Muhavoor Primary Agricultural Cooperation Society Ltd Vs The Income Tax Officer
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 30963 (HC-MADRAS)
-
Assessee is entitled to be compensated for delay in payment of money that it could have used if the money had been remitted within reasonable timeframe and the delay of four years cannot be construed as a reasonable period.
G K Choksi and Co Vs THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2023) TaxCorp(LJ) 30962 (HC-DELHI)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.