Follow Us:

All High Courts

Gift from abroad cannot be taxed on mere suspicion: HC

October 31, 2015 1838 Views 0 comment Print

In our opinion, the Tribunal had, on merits, come to the conclusion that the gifts were genuine. This is a pure question of fact. The Tribunal has examined the evidence which was available on the record and has arrived at the aforesaid finding.

Reopening to rectify Mistake committed during Original Assessment not permissible

October 31, 2015 1333 Views 0 comment Print

Jindal Photo Films Ltd. vs. DCIT (Delhi High Court) 1998 234 ITR 170- Following the settled trend of judicial opinion and the law laid down by their Lordships of the Supreme Court time and again, different High Courts of the country have taken the view that if an expenditure

No addition for Gift from abroad if Donor gives statement before AO regarding his capacity despite non production of any document

October 31, 2015 1130 Views 0 comment Print

Delhi High Court held In the case of CIT vs. Sudhir Budhraja that the findings of the Tribunal are based on sufficient material and cannot be stated to be perverse. On the other hand that the AO had no material

Re-opening of assessment not permissible on same set of materials considered in original assessment

October 31, 2015 949 Views 0 comment Print

Delhi High Court held In the case of Turner Broadcasting Systems Asia Pacific INC. vs. DDIT that the assessing officer has merely intended to revisit the concluded assessments and it is a clear case of change of opinion

No liability on Flipkart under KVAT as no clear finding to held sale as Interstate sale which already taxed under CST Act: HC

October 30, 2015 3824 Views 0 comment Print

Kerala High Court held In the case of Flipkart Internet (P.) Ltd. vs. State of Kerala that It is well settled that show cause notices issued by statutory authorities particularly in case of imposition of penalty on an assessee, cannot pre-determine the guilt of an assessee.

Penalty u/s 271E not maintainable if notice is issued after the period specified in Section 275(1)(c)

October 30, 2015 1630 Views 0 comment Print

Delhi High Court held In the case of Principal CIT vs. JKD Capital & Finlease Ltd. that in terms of the provision u/s 275 (1) (c), there are two distinct periods of limitation for passing a penalty order, and one that expires later will apply.

Issue of notice u/s 143(2) before finalisation of reassessment order is mandatory

October 30, 2015 5971 Views 1 comment Print

Delhi High Court held In the case of Principal CIT vs. Shri Jai Shiv Shankar Traders Pvt. Ltd. that the failure by the AO to issue a notice to the Assessee under Section 143(2) subsequent to 16th December 2010

Ad-hoc provision for transit breakage is contingent liability & not required to be recognised as per AS- 29 of ICAI

October 30, 2015 2152 Views 0 comment Print

Delhi High Court held In the case of Seagram Distilleries Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT that in the current case there is no reasonable scientific method adopted by the Assessee to estimate the transit breakages to justify such provision.

Sec. 10B Interest on FDRs on margin kept in bank for utilization of letter of credit limits is business Income

October 30, 2015 1079 Views 0 comment Print

Delhi High Court held In the case of Principal CIT vs. Universal Precision Screws that interest on fixed deposits has the requisite characteristic of business income and has a nexus to the business activities of the Assessee.

AO not empowered to initiate reassessment proceedings upon a mere change of opinion

October 30, 2015 5148 Views 0 comment Print

CIT vs Kelvinator of India Ltd. (Delhi High Court -Full Bench) [2002] 256 ITR 1/123- When a regular order of assessment is passed in terms of section 143 (3) of the Act, a presumption can be raised that such an order has been passed on application of mind.

Search Post by Date
July 2026
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031