Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


ITO v. Aecom Technical Services Inc [2026] 310 Taxman 662 (SC) Editorial : Aecom Technical Services Inc. v. ITO(IT) [2025] 305 taxman 234 /[2026] 485 ITR 357 (Delhi) (HC)

S. 197: Deduction at source-Certificate for lower rate-Make avialble-Assessee, a US company, provided support services to Indian AEs; cross charges received by the assessee from its AEs were not taxable as FTS/FIS or royalty under India-US DTAA, as the services did not make available technical knowledge nor involve transfer of copyright-DTAA-India-USA-SLP of revenue dismissed.[S.9(1)(vi), 9(1)(vii),Art. 12(3), Art. 136]

Ernst and Young LLP v. ACIT(IT) [2026] 310 Taxman 25 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 195 : Deduction at source-Non-resident-Other sums-Virtual service-Petitioner-LLP was issued a certificate under section 195 at 5.25% despite a prior High Court finding of no taxability and remand, certificate was to be treated as one of ‘Nil’ rate rather than 5.25% for relevant and subsequent years if application was made, and competent authority could depart from this only if it found a PE in India or taxability on merits in future applications-DTAA-India-UK [S. 9(1)(i), Art. 5, Art. 226]

Executive Engineer, BNT Project v. State (2026) 310 Taxman 685 (Karn)(HC)

S. 194LA: Deduction at source-Compensation on acquisition of certain immovable property-Compensation awarded on account of compulsory acquisition of land was not subject to deduction of tax at source-All payments made pursuant to the Mediation Agreement, whether to joint accounts or individual accounts, shall be effected without any deduction of tax at source. [The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, 89, read with Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC.]

CIT v. Bose Corporation India (P.) Ltd. (2026) 310 Taxman 178 (SC) Editorial : CIT(TDS) v. Bose Corporation India (P.) Ltd. (2026) 184 taxmann.com 218 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 194C: Deduction at source-Contractors-Common Area Maintenance (CAM)-Not rent-Liable to deduct tax at source under section 194C and not under section 194I-SLP of revenue dismissed. [S. 194I, Art. 136]

Dr.Arvind Kumar R Shaw v. UOI (2026) 310 Taxman 272 (Mad)(HC) Editorial : Dr.Arvind Kumar R Shaw v. UOI (Mad)(HC)(WP No.14256 of 2024 dt. 27-1-2026)

S. 153C : Assessment-Income of any other person-Search-Alternative remedy-Order of single judge affirmed.[Art. 226]

Sugunapuram Palanisamy Velumani v. ACIT (2026) 310 Taxman 479 (Mad)(HC)

S. 153C: Assessment-Income of any other person-Search and seizure-Third party statement not relied upon-Opportunity of cross-examination not required-Writ petition dismissed. [Art. 226]

PCIT, Central v. Maneesh Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (2026) 310 Taxman 470 (Bom)(HC)

S. 153A : Assessment-Search-No incriminating material-Unabated assessment-Order of Tribunal deleting the addition is affirmed. [S. 143(1), 143(3), 260A]

Triple S. Stock and Shares (P.) Ltd. v. ITO (2026) 310 Taxman 652 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 153A: Assessment-Search-Short-term capital loss-Block period-Previous assessment order(s) of block period become infructuous or unenforceable, irrespective of fact whether or not the issue or demand allowance/disallowance that was made previously has been dealt with and incorporated-no disallowance of short-term capital loss in case of assessee in subsequent order; such position would prevail. [S.132, 143(3)]

ACIT (Central) v. Mahamaya Steel Industries Ltd. (2026) 310 Taxman 487 (SC) Editorial: ACIT (Central) v. Mahamaya Steel Industries Ltd. (2026) 185 taxmann.com 254 (Chhattisgarh) (HC)

S. 153A: Assessment-Search-Alleged unaccounted addition-Rejection of books of account-Order of the High Court deleting the addition is affirmed-SLP of revenue dismissed. [S.143(3), Art. 136]

Dy. CIT v. Blue Yonder India (P.) Ltd. (2026) 310 Taxman 10 (Karn)(HC) Editorial: Order of single judge, Blue Yonder India (P.) Ltd v. UOI (Karn)(HC) (WP No. 14156 /2025 (T-IT) dt. 11-9-2025)

S. 153 : Assessment-Reassessment-Limitation-Refund-Even assuming that, prior to amendment, no period of limitation was prescribed, any order now sought to be passed pursuant to directions of the Tribunal dated 03.04.2017 would be unreasonably delayed and barred by limitation. Refund of taxes with applicable interest as directed could not be faulted. [S. 92CA, 237, Art. 226]