Income Tax : The issue is when High Courts can entertain appeals against ITAT orders. The key takeaway is that only debatable, material legal q...
Income Tax : Supreme Court disallows ₹10 crore bad debt deduction for Khyati Realtors Pvt Ltd, ruling it as capital expenditure, not eligible...
Income Tax : Explore remedies for taxpayers under the Income Tax Act, 1961, comparing appeals & revisions. Understand procedures, limitations &...
Income Tax : On commencement of regular assessment proceedings u/s 143(2) of Act , there is no need for intimation u/s 143(1)(a)(i) Where the s...
Income Tax : Substantial question of Law (SQL). On interpretation of section 260A of the Income Tax Act , 1961 and section 100 of the code of c...
Income Tax : Madras High Court held that time-share membership fees could not be fully taxed in the year of receipt since the assessee had cont...
Income Tax : The Tribunal ruled in favour of the assessee after noting that audited financials, PAN, bank statements, ITRs, confirmations, and ...
Income Tax : The Hyderabad ITAT held that only the actual period lost during the limitation period can be excluded under Explanation-1 to Secti...
Income Tax : The High Court ruled that reopening under Sections 147 and 148 was unsustainable because the Assessing Officer’s reasons amounte...
Income Tax : The Delhi High Court held that shareholders of a foreign company cannot be taxed on the company’s rental income and capital gain...
DGFT : All conditions in policy circular no 15 of 1st February 2011 will continue to apply, except the specification about dates and the ...
Delhi High Court sends Pushpa Saluja’s appeal back to ITAT, questioning Section 68 application on alleged bogus purchases and full addition.
The charges paid by the Assessee’s customers are for availing services, which the Assessee provides by using its proprietary equipment and other assets. No part of its equipment or IPRs are alienated by the Assessee in favour of its customers for their use.
The company had sought a NIL tax deduction certificate under Section 195, arguing that the payments did not constitute royalty either under domestic tax law or the DTAA, and that Intelsat had no permanent establishment (PE) in India.
Karnataka High Court rules Ace Designers’ write-off of foreign subsidiary investment is a business loss, not capital loss, citing commercial expediency.
Bombay High Court upholds ITAT ruling, stating Section 14A disallowance and Section 115JB adjustment for exempt income are not applicable if no exempt income is earned.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court upheld the denial of Section 54 capital gains exemption for two independent residential houses, reinforcing single-house benefit rule.
Calcutta High Court dismisses revenue’s appeal in PCIT vs. Hirak Vyapaar Pvt. Ltd., affirming deletion of Section 68 addition after thorough factual review by ITAT.
Calcutta High Court dismisses revenue’s appeal in PCIT vs. Sitka Mercantile, affirming ITAT’s deletion of Section 68 addition. Court finds no substantial question of law in factual findings.
Calcutta High Court dismisses revenue’s appeal against ITAT order for AY 2012-13 in PCIT vs. Maninya Comfin Pvt. Ltd., finding no substantial question of law.
Bombay High Court dismisses Revenue’s appeal against Agfa India, ruling reassessment invalid as Assessing Officer acted under dictation, lacking independent reason to believe income escaped assessment. Highlights judicial precedents on AO’s discretion.
