Delhi High Court

Concessional ticket to travel Agents cannot be termed as commission

CIT Vs. Singapore Airlines Ltd. (Delhi High Court)

12. In order to come to a definite conclusion whether section 194H of the Act would be applicable to the assessee-airline in respect of transaction, in issue, we propose to first look at the scope and ambit of section 194H of the Act and then analyse the transaction as to whether it falls within the purview of the said Section. In this co...

Read More

Proceedings u/s. 147 / 148 do not set aside original proceedings

Jay Bharat Maruti Ltd. Vs. CIT (Delhi High Court)

8.3 It cannot be disputed and it is not the case of either side that the reasons extracted hereinabove did not precede the issuance of notice under Section 148(1) of the Act. The requirement for recordal of reasons by the Assessing Officer before issuing a notice is provided for under sub-section (2) of Section 148 of the Act. 8.4 A peru...

Read More

Allowability of loss to be carried forward and set off against future income U/s. 80 of IT Act

CIT Vs Nalwa Investment Ltd (Delhi High Court)

11. Having heard the learned counsel for the Revenue as well as the assessee we are of the view that the answers to the questions framed has to be found in favour of the assessee and against Revenue for the reasons given hereinafter. It is clear upon perusal of the facts and circumstances quoted by us hereinabove that if JISCO had to have...

Read More

YUM! Restaurants (India) Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Income Tax

YUM! Restaurants (India) Pvt. Ltd Vs Commissioner of Income Tax (Delhi High Court)

Assessee-company under the tripartite agreement, in particular, clause 4.1 was under no obligation whatsoever to contribute any money to its wholly owned subsidiary YRMPL. The facts as found also show that whatever was spent by the assessee-company by way of advertisements towards liability to advertisers such as O&M and HTA etc. was allo...

Read More

Provision for a liability allowable if it can be estimated & if there is reasonable certainty

CIT Vs Insilco Limited (Delhi High Court)

5. Having heard the learned counsel for the Revenue as well as the assessee, we are of the view that no fault can be found with the reasoning of both the CIT(A) as well as the Tribunal. In our view, the issue raised by the Revenue before us that the liability under the "long service award" scheme of the assessee is contingent as the payme...

Read More

The levy under section 234B is compensatory in nature and is not in the nature of penalty: HC Delhi

CIT Vs Anand Prakash (Delhi High Court)

RELEVENT PARAGRAPH 11. We have examined the decisions cited by the counsel on both sides and after considering the submissions made by them, we agree with the learned counsel for the Revenue that the levy under Section 234B of the said Act is compensatory in nature and is not in the nature of penalty. We […]...

Read More

Properties acquired from common properties of common ancestor cannot be adjudicated by Company Court: Civil Suit not barred u/s. 397 to 407 of the Companies Act, 1956

Smt. Premvati & Ors. V. Smt. Bhagwati Devi & Ors. (Delhi High Court)

Originally the ancestor of the plaintiffs and the defendants, namely, B had started a proprietary concern. His son constituted six private limited companies and registered them under the Companies Act, 1956, and all the shareholders of these companies being the heirs of the late B, the companies were family concerns. The Defendants Nos. 2...

Read More

Reopening notice even if served after limitation period is valid: HC DELHI

Mayawati Vs. CIT (Delhi High Court)

(i) S. 149, which imposes the limitation period, requires the notice to be “issued” but not “served” within the limitation period. Once a notice is issued within the period of limitation, jurisdiction becomes vested in the AO to proceed to reassess. Service is not a condition precedent to conferment of jurisdiction but it is a con...

Read More

Allowability of interest paid in respect of loans obtained from Public Financial Institutions

CIT Vs Gujarat Guardian Ltd. (Delhi High Court)

17.1 According to us, as correctly held by the Tribunal, the assessee's claim for deduction had to be allowed, in one lump sum, keeping in view the provisions of Section 43B(d) which provides that any sum payable by the assessee as interest on any loan or borrowing from any financial institution shall be allowed to the assessee in the yea...

Read More

know-how fee related to grant of technical assistance and continuous know-how, including training of personnel,is revenue in nature

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs K Synthetics Limited (Delhi High Court)

The third installment of know-how fee which related to grant of technical assistance and continuous know-how, in Italy, including training of personnel, in Italy is revenue in nature, any interest paid in relation to delayed payments will also, have to be treated, as one, which is, on revenue account....

Read More

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (4,432)
Company Law (5,265)
Custom Duty (7,544)
DGFT (4,089)
Excise Duty (4,304)
Fema / RBI (3,937)
Finance (4,104)
Income Tax (31,565)
SEBI (3,289)
Service Tax (3,496)