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 Karnataka High Court, upholding the ITAT’s order, reiterated that discounts on the issuance of ESOPs are allowable deductions under Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, in line with the decision in Biocon Ltd.
Calcutta HC upholds ITAT’s dismissal of revenue’s appeal, affirming assessment order under Section 153 as invalid due to delayed service and legal non-compliance.
Allahabad HC directs TPO to review interest on delayed receivables from AE, affirming that working capital adjustments subsume such interest.
Rajasthan High Court dismisses PCIT appeal under Section 263, citing tax demand below Rs. 2 crore in case of Pratap Technocrats Pvt Ltd for AY 2018-19.
Chhattisgarh High Court held that addition u/s. 68 r.w.s. 69A of the Income Tax Act towards unexplained income sustained since assessee failed to substantiate the nature and source of cash deposits in bank.
Calcutta HC dismisses revenue’s appeal in PCIT vs. Chetan Kumar Tekriwal case, ruling that Section 271(1)(c) penalty is not applicable when full disclosure is made.
Chhattisgarh High Court reiterated that if the AO’s view is legally permissible, even if it results in a lower tax liability, the revisional authority cannot invoke Section 263 simply because it disagrees with the AO’s approach.
Gauhati High Court held that Explanation inserted to section 14A vide the Finance Act, 2022 is applicable prospectively and order holding that the said insertion is clarificatory and hence retrospective in nature is erroneous.
Punjab and Haryana High Court held that benefit of section 12AA of the Income Tax Act cannot be denied to the institute that is duly registered as educational trust and earning in utilised for the purpose of advancement of education.
Delhi High Court held that difference between purchase price of Stock Appreciation Right and the sale price at the time of exercise by the employees, holding the same to be revenue loss allowable as business deduction as expenditure incurred as per SEBI guidelines.
