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

Shri Panchmurti Education Society v. ITO (ITAT Nagpur)

The NAGPUR BENCH has held that S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes-Belated filing of return- Denial of exemption is not justified- Addition made under Section 143(1)(a)(ii) of the Act is deleted-Directed to accept the returned income-Circular of CBDT is binding on Revenue. [S. 12, 12A(1)(b), 119, 139(1), 139(4), 143(1)(a)(ii)] Allowing the appeal of the assessee the Tribunal held that… Read More ...

Bharat Education Society v. UOI (Bombay High Court)

The Bombay High Court has held that S. 119 : Central Board of Direct Taxes- Circular-Condonation of delay of 1585 days-Revised return-Principle of natural justice-No personal hearing was granted-In the absence of any provision to the contrary, such principles should be read into the unoccupied interstices of a statute-Order of rejection is set aside and directed to pass the order after granting… Read More ...

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX – INTERNATIONAL TAXATION versus SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO. LTD (Delhi High Court)

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 ...

Jayant Avinash Dave v. ACIT (Bombay High Court)

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 ...

ACIT v. Jay Bharat Mehta (ITAT Mumbai)

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 ...

ACIT v. Jay Bharat Mehta (ITAT Mumbai)

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 ...

Laxminath Investment & Management Consultants Pvt. Ltd (Bombay High Court)

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 ...

PCIT v. Tata Industries Ltd (Bombay High Court)

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 ...

PCIT v. Pravin U. Parmar (Jain) (Bombay High Court)

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 ...

C.C. Dangi & Associates v. UOI (Bombay High Court)

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 ...