Income Tax : The three-judge bench of Supreme Court of India in the case of Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax v. M/S Pepsi Foods Ltd struck dow...
Income Tax : A perusal of this order reveals that the Tribunal has recorded a finding that it is empowered by Section 254 of the Act to stay pr...
Income Tax : The existing provisions of Section 254(2) provide for a time-limit of four years from the date of the order of the Appellate Tribu...
Income Tax : Bombay High Court held that failure to pass a fresh assessment within Section 153 limitation required acceptance of the returned i...
Income Tax : ITAT held the assessment time-barred as the AO failed to pass the final order within the mandatory timeline under Section 144C(13)...
Income Tax : Provisions that were typically restricted or viewed as contingent become fully deductible business expenses the moment they were q...
Income Tax : The ITAT held that the assessment was invalid because it was completed by an Assistant Commissioner who lacked pecuniary jurisdict...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai allowed deduction of ESOP expenses under Section 37(1) by following Karnataka High Court's ruling in Biocon Ltd. Tribu...
The petitioner is a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and is a subsidiary of Huawei Technologies Coopertief U.A (Netherlands). The return of the petitioner was picked up for scrutiny.
ITAT Kolkata held that notice issued under section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act by AO not having valid jurisdiction is not sustainable in law. Accordingly, assessment proceeding based on an invalid notice is liable to be quashed.
ITAT Bangalore held that dismissal of appeal by CIT(A) merely because the same was filed belatedly not justified as CIT(A) failed to grant an opportunity of being heard to the assessee so as to the grounds for condonation.
Held that the capital subsidy should be reduced for computation of book profit. Particularly in view of the excruciating fact that reduction of subsidy from written down value was accepted by the Assessing Officer and he did not tinker with the amount of depreciation claimed.
Karnataka High Court held that the appellate authority under POSH Act, 2013, despite the absence of specific provision for granting of interim order, would have the power to consider the interim application.
Gujarat High Court held that once indexed renovation expense of co-owner accepted, the assessee is not required to produce any documents to prove his share of indexed renovation expense. Accordingly, allowance should be granted even without proof.
Madhya Pradesh High Court held that the non-functionality of the TRACES Portal shall not be grounds for denying the benefit arising out of the statutory provision under the Income Tax Act.
Delhi High Court held that passing of a draft assessment order as mandated under section 144C of the Income Tax Act is mandatory prior to passing of final assessment order. Accordingly, order liable to be set aside.
Delhi High Court held that passing of fresh assessment order beyond time limit prescribed under section 153(3) of the Income Tax Act cannot be sustained and hence set aside.
Delhi High Court held that as directed by Tribunal AO was required to verify and attend grievance of short credit of TDS. Thus, restricting TDS claim of petitioner to disclosures made in return unjustified.
