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 : Calcutta HC dismissed the Revenue's appeal after the remand report confirmed the disputed receipt was sale proceeds of investments...
Income Tax : Delhi High Court ruled that expenditure cannot be disallowed under Section 14A unless exempt income is actually earned in the rele...
Income Tax : Bombay High Court held that non-compliance with Section 144B raised a jurisdictional issue requiring ITAT adjudication and set asi...
Income Tax : Gujarat High Court upheld deletion of the Section 271D penalty, holding that absence of recorded satisfaction in the assessment or...
Income Tax : The High Court declined to examine bogus purchase issues after holding the Revenue's appeal not maintainable due to low tax effect...
DGFT : All conditions in policy circular no 15 of 1st February 2011 will continue to apply, except the specification about dates and the ...
The Calcutta High Court dismissed a revenue appeal, upholding the ITAT’s order to delete an addition under Section 68. The court found no question of law.
Bombay High Court held that in absence of express authorization, thus service upon the Chartered Accountant [CA] do not absolve the Tribunal of serving the copies of the order upon the assessee. Thus, appeal allowed and delay condoned.
Where Cooperative Society was engaged in the business of providing credit facilities to its members, they deposited excess amount for short term in banks, interest earned was entitled for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i).
Uttarakhand High Court held that Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 cannot be made applicable to short deduction of tax at source and the disallowance made was rightly directed to be deleted. Accordingly, writ of revenue dismissed.
The Madras High Court ruled that short-term capital gains from the sale of depreciable business assets can be set off against brought forward business losses, citing a similar Bombay High Court judgment.
Calcutta High Court dismisses revenue appeal, upholding ITAT’s decision to quash reassessment against Gillanders Arbuthnot due to lack of new evidence.
Calcutta High Court held that merely because share transactions were done through stock exchanges it doesn’t make the transactions genuine. Accordingly, bogus capital loss claim rejected and appeal of revenue allowed.
Calcutta High Court held that addition towards share capital/ premium as unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Income Tax Act justified since the assessee did not discharge the creditworthiness and the genuineness of the transactions. Accordingly, appeal of revenue allowed.
Delhi High Court held that in absence of transfer of title or sale of property, no incidence of tax can be invoked. Accordingly, addition u/s. 68 on account of sale not justifiable in absence of any transfer. Hence, appeal of revenue dismissed.
Supreme Court held that Hyatt International has a fixed place Permanent Establishment in India within the meaning of Article 5(1) of the DTAA, and hence income received under Strategic Oversight Services Agreement [SOSA] attributable to such PE and is taxable in India.
