Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


CIT (IT) v. Microsoft Regional Sales Pte.Ltd (2024) 297 Taxman 535 (SC) Editorial : CIT(IT) v. Microsoft Regional Sales Pte.Ltd (2024) 159 taxmann.com 278 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 9(1)(vi) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Royalty-Fees for technical services-Revenue from software sales to Indian clients, said revenue could not be treated as royalty and subjected to Indian taxation-DTAA-India-USA [S.9(1)(vii), 195, art. 12, Art.136]

Hyatt International-Southwest Asia Ltd v. ADIT(2024) 297 Taxman 497 /464 ITR 508/ 337 CTR 39 (Delhi)(HC)/Editorial : Refer, Hyatt International Southwest Asia Ltd. v. ADCIT (2024) 340 CTR 633 242 DTR 177 / 166 Taxmann.com 466 (FB) (Delhi)(HC)

S. 9(1)(i): Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Business connection-Strategic Oversight services-Not royalty-Business income-Since hotel premises were at disposal of assessee in respect of its business activities, Tribunal had rightly held that assessee had a PE in India in form of fixed place through which it carried on its business-DTAA-India-UAE [S. 9(1)(vi), art. 5(2)(a), 12]

PCIT v. Sunbeam Auto (P.) Ltd (2024) 297 Taxman 375 / 463 ITR 3 /337 CTR 249 (SC) Editorial : Sunbeam Auto (P.) Ltd v. PCIT (2020) 116 taxmann.com 763/ (2018) 402 ITR 309 (Delhi))(HC)

S. 4 : Income-Capital or revenue-Subsidy-Sales tax subsidy to be treated as a capital receipt-Department’s SLP dismissed.

PCIT v. National Textiles Corporation Ltd (2023) 226 DTR 281 / (2024)462 ITR 224 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Wrong claim of deduction-Order of Tribunal deleting the penalty is affirmed.[S. 260A]

PCIT v. Minu Bakshi (Ms.) (2024)462 ITR 301 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Furnishing inaccurate particulars-Order of penalty should clearly specify ground on which it is levied. [S. 260A]

Chambal Fertilizers and Chemicals Ltd. v. PCIT [2024]297 Taxman 168 / 462 ITR 4 (Raj)(HC)

S. 270AA : Immunity from the imposition of penalty, etc-No opportunity of hearing-No evidence to show misrepresentation of income or suppression of facts-Voluntary disclosure by the assessee and the failure of the authorities to properly apply the provisions, the court quashed the penalty order. [S. 264, 270A(9) 270AA(4), Art. 226]

PCIT v. Nya International (2024)462 ITR 44 (Guj)(HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Special Economic Zones-Subjective exercise-Order of Tribunal quashing the revision is affirmed.[S.10AA]

PCIT v. Dimple Murarka (2024)462 ITR 212 (Orissa)(HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Survey-Stock-Order of revision is not valid.[S.133A]

PCIT v. UOI (2024)462 ITR 150 /337 CTR 876 (Pat)(HC)

S. 245D : Settlement Commission-Settlement of cases-Procedure-Application-Amendment by Finance Act, 2007-Settlement Commission called report-Failure to submit report with in time-Direction to proceed with application is valid-Writ petition of Revenue is dismissed. [S.245D(1), 245D(2B), 245D(2C), 245D(4), Art. 226]

Saudi Telecom Company v. CIT (IT) (2024)462 ITR 168 (Karn)(HC)

S. 225 : Collection and recovery-Stay of proceedings-Pendency of appeal before CIT(A)-Deposit of 20 Per Cent. of demand-Liberty reserved to assessee to request Commissioner (Appeals) to consider merits of case expeditiously. [S. 226,250, Art. 226]