Month: August 2015

Delhi H.C : The Respondent Assessee for the said AYs under Section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’) were not sustainable because no incriminating material concerning such additions were found during the course of search and further no assessments for such years were pending on the date of search

High Court Of Delhi CIT vs. Kabul Chawla Section 153A, 132, 143(1), 2(22)(e) Asst. Year 2002-03, 2005-06 & 2006-07 S. Muralidhar & Vibhu Bakhru, JJ ITA 707/2014, 709/2014, 713/2014 28th August, 2015 Counsel appeared: Suruchi Aggarwal, Senior Standing counsel with Lakshmi Gurung, Advocate for the Petitioner.: C.S. Aggarwal, Senior Advocate with Manish Sharma, Prakash Kumar and …

Punjab & Haryana H.C : the learned ITAT has erred in treating chargeability of payments made to doctors who are regular employees of the hospital as per the provisions of Section 194J of the Income Tax Act, 1961 instead of Section 192 of the Income Tax Act, 1961? ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned ITAT is right in law in holding that there does not exist an employer/employee relationship between the doctors and the hospital and the assessee is not liable to make deduction of tax at source under section 192

High Court Of Punjab & Haryana CIT (TDS) vs. Ivy Health Life Sciences (P.)Ltd. Section 260A, 194J, 192, 133A, 201(1A), 192(1), 28, 44AB, 44AA, 10, 7, 201 Asst. Year 2009-10 Ajay Kumar Mittal & Ramendra Jain, JJ ITA No. 142 of 2013 (O&M) 26th August, 2015 Counsel appeared: Yogesh Putney, Adv. for the Appellant: Pankaj Jain, …

Punjab & Haryana H.C : Where two Mauritius based companies sold their shareholdings in an Indian company to assessee, in terms of article 13 of India-Mauritius DTAA, capital gain arising from sale of shares was taxable in Mauritius and, therefore, assessee was not required to deduct tax at source while making payment of sale consideration of shares

High Court Of Punjab And Haryana Serco BPO (P.) Ltd. vs. Authority for Advance Rulings, New Delhi Section 9 S.J. Vazifdar, ACTG. CJ. And G.S. Sandhawalia, J. Civil Writ Petition No. 11037 Of 2014 (O&M) August 26, 2015 ORDER S.J. Vazifdar, Actg. CJ. – The petitioner has challenged an order dated 02.05.2014 issued by respondent No.1 …

Delhi H.C : Commissioner (Appeals) can entertain claim of bad debts written off by assessee even during course of appellate proceedings otherwise than by way of a revised return

High Court Of Delhi Pr.CIT vs. Western India Shipyard Ltd. Assessment year 2006-07 Section 36(1)(vii)/(1) Dr. S.Muralidhar And Vibhu Bakhru, JJ. IT Appeal No. 644 Of 2015 August 25, 2015 JUDGMENT 1. This appeal is filed against the order dated February 25, 2015, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (“the ITAT”) in I.T.A. No. 2615/Del/ 2012 …

Karnataka H.C : Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Reassessment made u/s 147 of the Act 1961 on 10.12.2007 for the Asst, year 2004-2005 was valid when the original Return of income involuntarily filed on 21.3.2007 remained undisposed of when the proceedings u/s 147

High Court Of Karnataka C.M. Mahadeva vs. CIT Section 148, 147 Asst. Year 2004-05 Vineet Saran & B.Manohar, JJ. ITA NO. 795/2009 24th August, 2015 Counsel Appeared: G. Venkatesh for K.S. Hanumantha Rao, Adv., for the Appellant. : E.I. Sanmathi, Adv., for the Respondent. JUDGMENT: This is an appeal filed by the assessee, who is an …

Bombay H.C : The seized jewellery represented unaccounted income of the appellant when documentary evidence was found at the time of search to show that part of it belonged to the appellants father, late mother and the minor children who were wealth-tax and income-tax assessees in the earlier years

High Court Of Bombay Paras Shantilal Shah vs. DCIT, Mumbai Block Period : 1-4-1996 To 11-12-1996 Section : 158B M. S. Sanklecha And N.M. Jamdar, JJ. IT Appeal Nos. 1134 To 1137 Of 2000 August 21, 2015 JUDGMENT M.S. Sanklecha, J. – These four appeals under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’) …

Madhya Pradesh H.C : Where completion certificate of housing project of assessee was issued after cut off date by Local Authority but mentioned date of completion of project before cut off date, same could not fulfil condition specified in section 80-IB (10)(a) read with explanation (ii) thereunder and assessee was not entitled to deduction under section 80-IB (10)(a)

High Court Of Madhya Pradesh CIT, Bhopal vs. Global Reality Section 80-IB Assessment years 2004-05 to 2006- A.M. Khanwilkar, CJ. And K.K. Trivedi, J. IT Appeal Nos. 35, 36 And 40 Of 2012 August 21, 2015 JUDGMEN A.M. Khanwilkar, CJ. – These appeals pertain to the same assessee, filed by the Department against the common judgment …
Malcare WordPress Security