Court held that dividend remains income of the shareholder and DDT is an additional income tax covered under Article 2, restricting India’s taxing rights to 10% under Article 11 of the India–UK DTAA.
The Allahabad High Court ruled that parts replaced during warranty and AMC periods are taxable, applying the Supreme Court’s Tata Motors judgment. Tax liability arises even if no direct payment is charged to customers.
Summary: The Supreme Court held that a sub-vendor cannot force arbitration against a principal employer without contractual privity. BCL’s claim failed as it lacked genuine intent to be bound by HPCL’s agreement.
ITAT held that mass same-day approval without reviewing records violated Section 153D. The ruling confirms that mechanical approvals invalidate 153A assessments.
ITAT Hyderabad rules that gross sale proceeds of capital assets cannot be treated as taxable income without allowing cost of acquisition. Tribunal orders reassessment to compute correct capital gains, despite assessee’s non-compliance.
The court held that non-disclosure of CESS in GSTR-3B, corrected in GSTR-9, was revenue neutral. The appellate authority was directed to reconsider the case.
The tax authority’s assessment and penalty were set aside as the assessee was not given a fair opportunity to submit documents or Rule 46A application. The court emphasized adherence to natural justice before rejecting section 54F claims.
ITAT Kolkata deletes ₹7.84 crore addition on F&O and currency-derivative losses as AO relied solely on a now-vacated SEBI interim order. Tribunal emphasized that the assessee submitted full documentary evidence, which remained unrebutted, confirming losses as genuine.
The Revenue relied on third-party statements and WhatsApp data to allege an unrecorded ₹25 crore cash loan, but brought no supporting inquiry or cross-examination. The Tribunal held that the AO’s conclusion was speculative, especially when bank-backed evidence, TDS records, and a registered loan agreement supported only a ₹10 crore loan. Key takeaway: additions under Section 69A require concrete evidence, not assumptions.
The Court held that brief delays in producing documents during transit do not constitute grounds for a Section 48(5) VAT penalty, setting aside the penalty imposed on the assessee.