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 ...
In a crucial judgment, Calcutta High Court dismisses the appeal against the ITAT decision, upholding the quashing of CIT’s order speculating understatement in closing stock without specific findings. Learn the key details and legal analysis.
Delhi High Court rules in PCIT vs Mohak Real Estate Pvt Ltd case that inadequate enquiry alone doesn’t warrant invoking Section 263 of Income Tax Act.
Bombay High Court held that plea of defect in the notice cannot be accepted as it had caused no prejudice to the assessee and the assessee “clearly understood” what was the purport and import of notice issued under section 274 read with Section 271 of the Act.
HC court upheld factual findings of lower authorities, emphasizing its limited jurisdiction under Section 260A of Income Tax Act. It clarified that it cannot reevaluate questions of fact in the absence of any grounds alleging perversity in the findings.
Delhi High Court ruling on Income Tax: Department’s U-turn on 80IA deduction in the 4th year deemed unjustified. Case analysis of PCIT vs. BT Global Communications India Pvt. Ltd.
Gujarat High Court held that as agreement entered into is for the development of infrastructure facility and not the works contract hence assessee is eligible to avail deduction available under section 80IA(4) of the Income Tax Act.
Delhi High Court held that the consideration received in terms of Strategic Oversight Services Agreements (SOSA) cannot be termed as Royalty under Article 12 of the DTAA even if extensive services are rendered which includes access to written knowledge, processes, and commercial information in furtherance of the services.
ITAT Delhi held that simultaneous issue of the DIN number is insignificant and superfluous exercise, in the absence of mentioning the DIN number on the body of AO’s order. Thus, Assessment order without DIN is void ab initio.
ITAT Kolkata held that revisionary proceedings u/s. 263 initiated in the name of non-existent entity, despite the fact that private limited company was converted into LLP and the conversion was brought to the knowledge of AO, is void ab initio and invalid.
The Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) order passed without Document Identification Number (DIN) number should be treated as invalid and was contrary to the CBDT Circular No.19/2019 dated 14th August 2019 as it was clear in the body of DRP order, no DIN number was mentioned nor there was any reason of not mentioning the DIN number in order of the DRP.
