The Delhi High Court held in the case of E-Funds International India Private Limited v. PR. CIT, while dismissing the appeals of the Revenue that revised computation was sufficient in the place of furnishing revised returns as there was only a minor technical fault as the figure of USDs was not changed into Rupees while computing the deduction under section 10A.
CIT v Proctor and Gamble Home Products Ltd- Bombay HC observed that the appeals filed by the Revenue was in a very causal manner without indicating the basis of the challenge. Further, it was observed that Rule of law implies certainty of law.
In the case of CIT v Trend Electronics, Bombay Court held that before issuance of reopening notice for assessment, the Revenue have to furnish the reasons for it. Otherwise, the notice will be considered as bad in Law.
ITAT Delhi held In the case of M/s National Agricultural Cooperative Marketing Federation of India Ltd. (NAFED) vs. JCIT that there is no qualitative difference between the two situations, viz., first, in which no enforceable liability to pay is created in the first instance, and second
ITAT Rajkot held In the case of GAC Shipping India Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO – International Taxation that entire freight income of the assessee, which is only from operation of ships in international traffic, is taxable only in Singapore.
ITAT Kolkata held In the case of DCIT vs. M/s G.K.K. Capital Markets (P) Limited that in case AO has not recorded satisfaction about the correctness of the claim of the assessee and straight away calculated the disallowance u/s 14A read with rule 8D, this disallowance is not maintainable.
Delhi High Court held In the case of Arun Khanna vs. The ICAI & ANR that the notice issued to the ICAI for demerger of the firms was as per the notified rules in this regard. As per these rules it is clear that no concurrence / acceptance from all partners is required and can be effected
In case of ITO Vs. M/s. Northern India Transport Company the Appellate Tribunal of New Delhi has held that Assessment Order Passed by the Assessing Officer having no jurisdiction to Assess the entity is null and void.
Delhi High Court held In the case of Rockland Hotels Ltd. vs. IT Settlement Commission that as per clauses (a)(v) and (a)(vi) of section 245C , only if a director of the petitioner companies has a substantial interest in the specified person (company), then, the petitioner companies
Delhi High Court held In the case of DIT (Exemption) vs. All India Personality Enhancement & Cultural Centre for Scholars Society that he expression ‘undisclosed income’ would connote assets or income, which the Assessee believes to be taxable
