Judgements Uploaded By Users In Category: Income-Tax Act
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
The Delhi High Court has held that Whether secondment of employees constitutes a Fixed Place Permanent Establishment [“PE”] in India within the meaning of Article 5 of the Double Tax Avoidance Treaty between India and Korea (i) Although information was exchanged and plans and strategies for the Indian market were also discussed, none of the activities undertaken by those seconded employees could… Read More ...
The Bombay High Court has held that S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Short term capital loss-Long term capital gains-No specific allegation in the reopening notice to disclose any material facts- Reasons for reopening were based entirely on records already available during the original assessment- Reopening notice, order disposing the objection order, reassessment order, and the demand notice is quashed… Read More ...
The Mumbai Tribunal has held that S. 54F : Capital gains-Investment in a residential house-Joint property purchase with wife-Joint transfer for consideration-The wife's inclusion in the property title was deemed nominal and for convenience-Denial of exemption is not valid. [S. 45, Transfer of Property Act, 1882, S. 45] The assessee claimed deduction under section 54F in respect of purchase of house… Read More ...
The Mumbai Tribunal has held that S. 68 : Cash credits-Sale of shares-Explained the nature and source-Investment and the transaction was part of a larger acquisition by KKR Group-Order of CIT(A) deleting the addition is affirmed. [S. 115BBE, 133(6)] Assessee sold 22,62,512 equity shares of J.B. Chemicals and Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (JBCPL) to Tau Investment Holdings Pte. Ltd. for ₹168.55 crore. He… Read More ...
The Bombay High Court has held that S. 127 : Power to transfer cases-Transferring the case from the Jurisdictional officer in Mumbai to the counterpart in New Delhi-No agreement between the Principal Commissioners of Mumbai and Delhi for the proposal of such a transfer -Compliance of natural justice-Transaction with specific group-Coordinated and centralised investigation -Transfer is valid-Writ petition is dismissed. [S. 127(2),… Read More ...
The Bombay High Court has held that S. 37(1) : Business expenditure–Upfront fees and brokerage fees–Non -convertible debentures – Year of allowability –If the tax rate is uniform in two years then, the deduction whether claimed by the assessee in the year one or two is of no consequence to the revenue- The revenue expenditure is to be allowed in the year… Read More ...
The Bombay High Court has held that S. 69C : Unexplained expenditure-Bogus purchases-Order of Tribunal affirming the 7% of GP rate is affirmed-No substantial question of law. [S. 143(3), 260A] The ITAT has restricted the addition only to the extent of 7 % of GP in respect of alleged bogus purchases. On appeal by the Revenue the dismissing the appeal the Court… Read More ...
The Bombay High Court has held that S. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice Principle of Natural Justice-Non-Application of Mind by Authorities-Role of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT)-Approval under Section 151-Strictures-Interplay Between CGST Act and Income Tax Act-Costs and Accountability of Tax Authorities-The High Court held that the reopening of assessment under Section 148 was invalid as… Read More ...
The Mumbai Tribunal has held that S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Additional legal ground is admitted-Not specifying the charge-Levy of penalty is not valid-Substantial question of law is admitted before High Court-Penalty cannot be levied-The decision in Veena Estate P. Ltd. v. CIT (2024) 464 ITR 483 (Bom.)(HC) is distinguished. [S. 68, 69, 260A, 274] The AO levied the penalty u/s. 271(1)( c)… Read More ...
The Supreme Court has held that The reduction in share capital of the subsidiary company and subsequent proportionate reduction in the shareholding of the assessee would be squarely covered within the ambit of the expression “sale, exchange or relinquishment of the asset” used in Section 2(47) the Income Tax Act, 1961 (a) Section 2(47) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which… Read More ...