Indo Continental Hotels And Resorts Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of U.P. – Allahabad High Court held that stamp duty cannot be levied based on speculative future use or potential market value unless officially reclassified by State from industrial to commercial. Since no such change had been formally declared, the deficiency was deemed improper.
Madras HC rules Settlement Commission orders can’t be rectified under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, upholding the principles from Brij Lal case.
Bombay High Court held that ‘water tax’ u/s. 141(1)(a) (i) and water benefit tax u/s. 140(1)(a)(ii) of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act is leviable irrespective of the fact whether water is actually consumed by the owner/occupier or not.
Bombay High Court held that initiation of reopening of assessment after expiry of four years from the end of relevant assessment year without failure on part of the petitioner to disclose any material fact fully and truly is unsustainable in law.
Assessee was a venture capital trust. Institutional investors contribute money to the trust fund and the same was managed by an Investment Manager. An investigation was conducted by Anti-Evasion Unit of the Jurisdictional Commissionerate against assessee.
Delhi High Court directed petitioner to satisfactorily prove that payment was duly made for inward supplies in respect of which it had claimed refund of accumulated Input Tax Credit (ITC).
Karnataka High Court held that department was aware about the facts while issuing first show cause notice. Hence, no suppression can be held against the appellant and invoked while raising demand for subsequent period. Accordingly, allegation of suppression of facts not sustained.
Tiger Global International III Holdings Vs Authority for Advance Rulings (Income- Tax) & Ors. (Delhi High Court) The Delhi High Court delivered a significant judgment in the case of Tiger Global International III Holdings v. The Authority for Advance Rulings (Income-Tax) & Ors., reaffirming the importance of the Tax Residency Certificate (TRC) in international tax […]
Rajasthan High Court held that since reassessment order is distinct and different, the period of limitation for exercising powers u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act would be the date of original assessment order. Thus, entire proceedings barred by limitation.
The Allahabad High Court quashed a stamp duty order against Ramvati Rathore, ruling the land was agricultural, and ordered a refund of the amount paid.
