These judgements are uploaded by our esteemed readers. If you have a judgement on an important topic that you would like to share with others, please use this form to upload it
ALL INDIA BANK OFFICERS’ CONFEDERATION VERSUS THE REGIONAL MANAGER, CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA (Supreme Court)
Supreme Court: Interest-free or concessional loans given by banks to employees are taxable fringe benefits. (i) Section 17(2)(viii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and Rule 3(7)(i) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 were challenged by staff unions and officers' associations of various banks on the grounds of constitutionality. They argued that Rule 3(7)(i) was arbitrary and… Read More ...
Nimir Kishore Mehta v. ACIT (Bom)(HC)
Bombay High Court: S. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Non-resident of Indian-Jurisdiction to be checked at the time of issue of notice-The Honourable Court also observed that the Assessing Officer has taken dishonest stand-Notice and consequential order passed by the Assessing Officer for the relevant year is quashed. [S. 120, 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), Art.… Read More ...
Sarfaraz S. Furniturewalla v. Afshan Sharfali Ashok Kumar (Bombay High Court)
Bombay High Court: S. 194I : Deduction at source-Rent-Alternative accommodation-Transit rent -Developer or Builder-Development agreement-Hardship Allowance / Rehabilitation Allowance / Displacement Allowance-Not revenue receipt-Not liable to tax-Not liable to deduct tax at source. [S. 4, Art. 226] On a writ the issue before the Court was as to whether there should be deduction of TDS on the amount… Read More ...
Hexaware Technologies Limited v. ACIT (Bombay High Court)
Bombay High Court: S. 148A : Reassessment - Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice - Whether TOLA is applicable for Assessment Year 2015-2016 S. 148A : Reassessment - Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice - Whether TOLA is applicable for Assessment Year 2015-2016 and whether any notice issued under Section 148 of the Act… Read More ...
Grace Associates v. UOI (Bombay High Court)
Bombay High Court: S. 237 : Refunds-Failure to issue refunds-Alleged “due to system issue“-Negligence of the officers-Court directed the Officer to credit the amount of the refund to the account of the petitioner not later than 10.30a.m on 30th April 2024, along with accumulated interest under section 244A of the Act, up to 29th April, 2024. [S. 244A,… Read More ...
Sunil Pran Sikand v. ACIT (Bombay High Court)
Bombay High Court: S. 45 : Capital gains-Consideration received for subsequent granting of development as per the commitment letter for granting permission to right for uploading TDR is assessable as long term capital gains and not as income from other sources – Substantial question of law raised first time before the Honourable High in an appeal filed by… Read More ...
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) vs BHARTI AIRTEL LIMITED (Supreme Court)
Supreme Court: Condonation of Delay A decision was taken by the Department not to file an appeal against the impugned order of the ITAT. It was only after coming to know that in the case of M/s Vodafone South Limited, the ITAT, Bangalore Bench had given a decision in favour of the Department that as an afterthought… Read More ...
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs GE INDIA TECHNOLOGY CENTRE PRIVATE LIMITED ETC (Supreme Court)
Supreme Court: A bench of Justices BR Gavai, BV Nagarathna and Pankaj Mithal rejected a batch of review petitions filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax both on merits as well as on the grounds of delay. This means tax liability of foreign software seller without a permanent establishment in India would reduce to the 2% equalisation… Read More ...
M/s Royal Drinks Vs Income Tax Officer (ITAT Nagpur)
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Pune Bench: Interest on Taxes not to be disallowed under section 43B of the income tax act. In the absence of statutory provisions under the income tax Act that is in absence of specific entry under clause (a) of section 43B of the income tax Act, the interest liability incurred by the assessee on account of delay… Read More ...
The Income Tax Officer vs. Rajendra Prasad Vaish (Rajasthan High Court)
Rajasthan High Court: 276CC. Failure to furnish returns of income. For bringing home the charge against the accused for his conviction under Section 276CC of the Act of 1961, it is essential on the part of the Income Tax Department to prove that there was willful attempt to evade any tax, penalty or interest chargeable. In the absence… Read More ...