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 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 ...
The Bangalore Tribunal has held that S. 56 : Income from other sources-Discretionary trust-Property-Interest from partnership firm and shares from unlisted company-Trust for the benefit of relatives of settler-Power with the trustees to add any persons or class of persons or charity as beneficiaries- Revision order on the ground that the Trust is not wholly benefit of beneficiaries-Amount of Rs. 669… Read More ...
The Bombay High Court has held that S. 254(2) : Appellate Tribunal-Rectification of mistake apparent from the record-Review-Statutory dues like the Provident Fund and Employees State Insurance -Payments were made before due date of filing of return-Allowed by the Tribunal-Corporation-Not deposited before due date of respective Acts-Delay of 92 days in filing miscellaneous application-Tribunal allowed the miscellaneous application of the Revenue of… Read More ...
The Madras High Court has held that (i) The Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) does have ‘exclusive powers’ to issue notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Both the JAO and the Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO)will have concurrent powers for ‘assessment, re-assessment and re-computation’ of the particular income in a faceless manner. (ii) The Directorate of IT (Systems) shall have… Read More ...
The Delhi High Court has held that The Liaison Office of the assessee did not constitute a PE in India, there was no DAPE and that the software did not result in the creation of a permanent establishment. (i) On an overall conspectus of the various decisions handed down by this Court as well as the Supreme Court insofar as Fixed Place… Read More ...
The Bombay High Court has held that S. 87A : Rebate of income-tax in case of certain individuals-New tax regime-Tax on income of individuals and Hindu undivided family- Rebate u/s 87A is substantive right which cannot be deprived by procedural changes such as changes in the utility software made by the department-The Court has directed the CBDT to extend the date of… Read More ...