In transfer pricing disputes, comparability analysis and use of appropriate filters has been one of the most prevalent issues, especially for captive cost plus remuneration service providers.
Pr. CIT (A) Vs M/s Bank Note Paper Mill (Karnataka High Court) HC expresses concern and anguish at the tendency of the Revenue Department to file unnecessary appeals u/s. 260-A of the Act even though the issues are ex facie covered by the decision of the jurisdictional High Courts or even the Hon’ble Supreme Court […]
M A Zahid Vs ACIT (Karnataka High Court) In this case First and foremost the petitioner is not accused of committing any non-bailable offence so as to invoke the jurisdiction under section 438 of Cr.P.C. Secondly, the apprehension expressed by the petitioner is also without any basis. As could be seen from the above Rules, […]
These appeals are filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) challenging the orders dated 17.03.2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bengaluru, in ITA No.613/Bang/2014 and ITA No.614/Bang/2014
Abhay Solvents Private Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner of Commercial (Karnataka High Court) In terms of Section 174(1)(f), it is clear that the repeal of the Act specified in Section 173 shall not affect any proceedings including that relating to an appeal, revision, review or reference, instituted before, on or after the appointed date, under the […]
M/s Global Agency Vs General Manger & Ors (Karnataka High Court) Unless a cause of action arises to the petitioner-assessee by an impugned action notice or order by the Respondents-Department, the academic questions raised by the petitioner-assessee cannot be determined under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition found to be premature […]
Remedy under section 264 could not be treated as regular remedy by passing regular remedy of appeals. Where assessee preferred petition under section 264 deliberately avoiding availing of regular remedy, it was rightly rejected and therefore, writ petition was to be dismissed.
As such, the assessee cannot be treated as the assessee in default in not deducting tax at source under section 194J of the Act. The arguments of the revenue that the fees paid by the assessee is towards technical services is imaginary one not established with substantial material.
M/s Navodaya Education Trust Vs Sri. Sunki Rajender Reddy (Karnataka High Court) The petitioner – Trust in question having the cloak of an Educational Trust, to enjoy the exemption from Income Tax obtained the approval under Section 10(23-C) of the Act, was thoroughly misused and abused by the Trustees who appear to be Members of […]
Revenue authorities and other Government Departments should not avail constitutional remedies for not good reasons, waste the public money and time of constitutional court for frivolous writ petitions
