Delhi High Court

Statement U/s. 132(4) Whether binding upon assessee or not

Pr. CIT Vs Manoj Hora (Delhi High Court)

Principal CIT Vs Manoj Hora (Delhi High Court) The text of section 132(4), clarifies that the presumption arises in the case of the searched party. In case the statements by the party whose premises are searched, or to be attributed to a third party – as in the case of the assessee, there has to […]...

Read More

Penalty proceedings initiated after 6 months from receipt of Adjudicatory Order is time barred

Salora International Ltd. Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Delhi High Court)

Salora International Ltd. Vs. CIT (Delhi High Court) A plain and textual reading of Section 275(1A) clarifies that the expiry of six months prescribed is to be reckoned from the date of completion of proceedings or from the end of the month in which the order of the CIT(A) or as the case may be […]...

Read More

Limitation period for revision petition U/s. 264 starts from the day assessee receives intimation U/s. 143(1)

Hargovind Pandey Vs Pr. CCE (Delhi High Court)

The challenge in this writ petition is to an order dated 21stDecember, 2016 passed by the Principal Commissioner of I ncome Tax (PCIT) rejecting the Petitioners application under Section 264 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act) on the ground of limitation....

Read More

Deemed Dividend applicable if Assessee diverted amount received for procuring Import Licenses for Share purchase

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/s Prasidh Leasing Limited (Delhi High Court)

While hearing the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs M/s Prasidh Leasing Limited, the Delhi High Court ruled that Provisions of Deemed Dividend applicable when Assessee diverted Advance amount received for procuring import licenses for purchase of shares under Section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act 1961....

Read More

Reopening after 4 years with approval of DIT instead of JCIT is invalid

Yum! Restaurants Asia Pte. Ltd. Vs. Dy. DIT & Ors. (Delhi High Court)

Reopening of assessment of A.Y. 2005-06 after expiry of four years without obtaining approval of an officer of the rank of Joint Commissioner was bad in law and even if such approval had been granted, by the officer superior i.e., the DIT, it would not cure the defect....

Read More

A claim of creditor cannot be said to be barred by limitation if acknowledged by the debtor

Commissioner Of Income Tax Del Vs. M/S Banaras House Ltd. (Delhi High Court)

A division bench of the Delhi HC comprising Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Chander Shekhar denied the dis allowance made in case of old creditors under section 40(1) of the Income Tax Act. ...

Read More

Exporters to furnish bonds to export without paying IGST: Delhi HC

Aphro Ecommerce Solutions (P.) Ltd. Vs Union of India (Delhi High Court)

The question raised in the present petition concerns Rule 96A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 and Circular No. 4/4/2017- GST issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs (GST Policy Wing), in terms of which any person exporting goods or services without payment of integrated tax is required to furnish a bond or a le...

Read More

HC allows Input tax credit of clean energy cess on coal stock as on 30.06.2017

Hind Energy & Coal Benefication (India) Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Delhi High Court)

Petitioner here will continue to pay the taxes as and when they fall due after availing and utilizing the credit for the cess already paid. This will, however, be subject to the final orders passed by this Court....

Read More

CA Final Result Controversy: HC asks ICAI to produce relevant documents

Milind Aggarwal & Ors Vs. ICAI (Delhi High Court)

In a interim order Delhi High Court has held in the case of Milind Aggarwal & Ors Vs. The Institute Of Chartered Accountants Of India that ICAI shall produce the relevant official records pertaining to the receipt and compilation of the documents, the moderation procedure adopted leading to the final declaration of results which would...

Read More

Non-Adjustable Deposit for Acquisition of Membership paid to NSE is Capital Expenditure

M/s Abhipra Capital Limited Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Investigation) (Delhi High Court)

In the case of M/s Abhipra Capital Limited vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Investigation), the Delhi High Court held that amount paid to National Stock Exchange (NSE) as non-adjustable deposit for acquisition of membership cannot be treated as revenue expenditure and the same would be termed as capital expenditure. ...

Read More

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (4,357)
Company Law (5,151)
Custom Duty (7,478)
DGFT (4,044)
Excise Duty (4,275)
Fema / RBI (3,891)
Finance (4,049)
Income Tax (31,161)
SEBI (3,238)
Service Tax (3,478)