Uttarakhand High Court

Income of non-resident co., from admin & support services to oil and gas field projects of Indian company outside India is not taxable in India

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs J. Ray Mc. Dermott Middle East Inc. (Uttarakhand High Court)

Assessee is a non-resident company. It entered into a contract with an Indian Company, but agreed to provide administrative and personnel support outside India. It noticed that the payment, pursuant to the contract, was received outside India. The Tribunal held that the said contract did not show that the administrative and the support se...

Read More

Business profits of non-resident US Company not having any PE in India would not be taxable U/s. 44BB as per article 7 of DTAA

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs Enron Oil & Gas Expat Services Inc. (Uttarakhand High Court)

Article 7 of DTAA requires a non-resident US enterprise to have a permanent establishment in India for being taxed in India, otherwise it is not taxable in any view of the said treaty, even it received any remuneration in connection with any matter provided in Section 44BB of the Act. In the judgment referred to above, ...

Read More

Interest on fixed deposit with banks cannot be claimed as exempt by a club on principal of mutuality

Commissioner of Income-tax, Dehradun Vs Dehradun Club Ltd. (Uttarakhand High Court)

In the instant case, the contributors, namely, the members of the assessee made contributions, which have been kept in fixed deposit with third party banks and those third party banks have contributed to the members fund. Accordingly, the members fund have been expanded not by the contributors/members, but by a third party. ...

Read More

S. 263 CIT can revise AO’s order of taxing receipt as ordinary income instead of taxing it u/s. 44BB

M-I Overseas Ltd. Vs Director of Income-tax, International Taxation-II (Uttarakhand High Court)

A look at the assessment order, in respect whereof power under section 263 of the Act was exercised, would amply make it clear that the Assessing Authority did not at all make any endeavour to ascertain, whether Rs. 96 and odd crores were received by the assessee for and in respect of services rendered by the assessee or the same was rece...

Read More

Tax Paid by employer on salary is not taxable in the hand of Employee

Director, Income Tax (International Taxation) Vs Sedco Forex International Drilling Inc & Others (Uttarakhand High Court at Nainital)

There is no dispute that the employer has entered into agreements with the employees and thereby has taken over an obligation to pay income tax payable by the employees. If the employer was not obliged to pay such income tax, the same would have been payable by the employees in question. Such payment, as has been provided in Section 10 (1...

Read More

If assessment order does not specify charging of interest, then it could not be charged or levied U/s. 156

CIT Vs M/s Dehradun Club Ltd. (Uttarakhand High Court)

CIT Vs. M/s Dehradun Club Ltd. (Uttarakhand HC)- The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the provision of charging interest under Section 234A, 234B & 234C of the Act is mandatory as held by the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Anjum M. H. Ghaswala & others 252 I.T.R. 1. There is no quarrel with the aforesaid p...

Read More

Taxpayer did not constitute a Construction PE under the DTAA as the contract carried on by the Taxpayer did not exceed the threshold period provided under the DTAA

The Commissioner of Income Tax Dehradun And another Vs M/s BKI/HAM v. o.f. (Uttarakhand High Court)

CIT vs. M/s BKI/HAM v.o.f. (Uttarakhand High Court)-Tribunal in the assessment order 1995-96 as well as the appellate authority in the assessment order 1994-95 have categorically given a finding of fact that the entire duration of the contract was from 27th December, 1993 till 26th June, 1994, i.e., less than six months. Article 5 (3) of ...

Read More

Potato chips classifiable as processed vegetable and taxable at the rate of 4%

M/s Shriya Enterprises Vs Commissioner, Commercial Taxes (Uttarakhand High Court)

Shriya Enterprises Vs. Commissioner,Commercial Taxes - , the court is the opinion that potato chips, being a processed vegetable, is liable to be taxed @ 4 per cent under entry 6 of Schedule-II(B) of the Act. Consequently, the impugned order of the assessing authority, the order of the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) as well as the order of...

Read More

Reassessment not permissible if reasons recorded are merely change of opinion

B. J. Services Company Middle East Ltd. and others Vs. DDIT (Uttarakhand High Court)

B. J. Services Company Middle East Ltd. and others Vs. DDIT (Uttarakhand High Court)- The combined effect of the provisions of Section 44BB, 44DA and 115A of the Act will not have a bearing to the cases in hand in as much as the Explanatory Note to the Finance Bill, 2010 clearly indicates that the amendments proposed in Section 44BB and 4...

Read More

If work undertaken by petitioner is ‘works contract’ which is defined under Section 2(55) of the VAT Act, 2005, it cannot be said that the respondents have imposed any tax without authority of law

Asso tech Super Tech (J.V.) Vs. State of Uttarakhand (Uttarakhand High Court)

Asso tech Super Tech (J.V.) Vs. State of Uttarakhand- Petitioner’s case is that he is not constructing the dwelling units on behalf of anyone else and the same is undertaken by the petitioner on his own behalf....

Read More

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (5,481)
Company Law (7,381)
Custom Duty (8,503)
DGFT (4,542)
Excise Duty (4,489)
Fema / RBI (4,704)
Finance (4,979)
Income Tax (37,274)
SEBI (3,988)
Service Tax (3,719)

Search Posts by Date

June 2021