Pr. CIT Vs Monnet Ispat and Energy Ltd. (Superme Court of India) Given Section 238 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, it is obvious that the Code will override anything inconsistent contained in any other enactment, including the Income-Tax Act. We may also refer in this Connection to Dena Bank vs. Bhikhabhai Prabhudas Parekh [&...

On Monday, 06th August 2018, the Honourable Supreme Court has stayed Bombay High Court Interim Order for granting relief to Disqualified Director by admitting Special Leave Petition by Ministry of Corporate Affairs....

CIT Vs. Sunita Dhadda (Supreme High Court)  HELD by the Supreme Court: We do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned order. The special leave petition is, accordingly, dismissed. Held by the Rajasthan High Court: 5. Counsel for the respondent has relied upon the following judgments :- “1. CIT VS. Dinesh Kumar Sharma, [&helli...

(1) Exemption notification should be interpreted strictly; the burden of proving applicability would be on the assessee to show that his case comes within the parameters of the exemption clause or exemption notification....

Recently, in Union of India v. Intercontinental Consultants and Technocrats Pvt. Ltd., Hon’ble SC had resolved the existing controversy regarding whether reimbursement expenses provided by service receiver are to be included in value of taxable service for charging to service tax. ...

Kishan Rao Vs Shankargouda (Supreme Court Of India) In the present case, the trial court as well as the Appellate Court having found that cheque contained the signatures of the accused and it was given to the appellant to present in the Bank of the presumption under Section 139 was rightly raised which was not […]...

Supreme Court has in the case of PCIT Vs. Tejua Rohitkumar Kapadia  upheld the Gujarat high Court Order and dismissed the special leave petition filed by Department on the issue of  deletion of Addition for Bogus Purchases.  Text of the High Court Judgment  in TAX APPEAL NO. 691 of 2017 dated: 18 September, 2017 is […]...

New Okhla Industrial Development Authority Vs CCIT (Supreme Court) Appellant namely ‘New Okhla Industrial Development Authority; claimed that he is covered by Clause (ii) of the Explanation to Section 10(2) i.e. Municipality as referred to in clause (e) of Article 243P of the Constitution. We, while discussing above provisions, have...

Waiver of loan for acquiring capital assets could not be taxed as perquisites under section 28(iv) since receipts were in the nature of cash or money. Section 41(1) of the Income Tax Act does not apply since waiver of loan does not amount to cessation of trading liability. It is a matter of record that the assessee had not claimed any de...

This appeal is preferred against the impugned judgment and order dated 18.09.2006 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in S.A. No. 780 of 2006 whereby learned single Judge of the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the appellants herein at the admission stage....