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 : ITAT Kolkata held that reopening of assessment framed u/s. 148A(d) without application of mind and without controverting the expla...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai held that passing of assessment order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act without disposing the objections raised by the as...
Income Tax : Bombay High Court held that assessment order passed after expiry of period of limitation as prescribed under section 153 of the In...
Income Tax : ITAT passed ex-parte order in absence of assessee and held that any assessment, whether it be first round or otherwise framed unde...
Income Tax : The petitioner is a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and is a subsidiary of Huawei Technologies Coopertief U.A (Ne...
The proceedings drawn, admittedly being beyond a period that was prescribed under sub-section (2A) of Section 153 and the consequential orders passed were all beyond the period of limitation prescribed under sub-section (2A) of Section 153 hence, the same being not sustainable, deserved to be and was accordingly set aside/quashed.
ITAT Delhi confirms addition u/s 68 of Income Tax Act due to the failure to prove creditor creditworthiness & transaction genuineness in Prestigious Enterprises Pvt. Ltd vs. ACIT.
ITAT Delhi’s decision in the case of Sumaitri Bima Distributors Pvt. Ltd vs. ITO regarding non-applicability of S.40(a)(ia) for TDS on salary before AY 2015-16.
The Delhi High Court directs the ITAT to reconsider the exclusion of Onward Technologies Limited (OTL) as a comparable in the transfer pricing study. Detailed analysis and conclusion.
ITAT Delhi held that it is settled principle of law that the disallowance under section 14A of the Income Tax Act cannot exceed the exempt income.
ITAT Delhi held that penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act not leviable since there is no concealment of particulars of income by the assessee.
Bombay High Court held that failure to pass a draft assessment order under section 144C(1) of the Income Tax Act results in rendering the final assessment as one without jurisdiction.
ITAT Mumbai held that amount of compensation for defective product being capital in nature cannot be adjusted from WDV of the assets.
Karnataka High Court held that even if the tax paid is found to be less than that payable, no further demand can be made for recovery of the balance amount when a fresh assessment is barred.
Jharkhand High Court held that once penalty order is set aside, it will be presumed that there is no concealment and hence prosecution under Section 276C(1) of the Income Tax Act will be quashed automatically.
