Month: September 2016

Bombay H.C : the limit of Rs. 40,000 laid down in section 37(3A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, could not be proportionately increased because the previous year relevant for the assessment year was seventeen months instead of twelve months

High Court Of Bombay Somaiya Organo-Chemicals Ltd. vs. CIT Section 37(1) Assessment Year 1980-81 M.S. Sanklecha And S.C. Gupte, JJ. IT Reference No. 114 Of 1998 September 30, 2016 JUDGMENT S. C. Gupte, J. – By this reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“Act”), the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (“Tribunal”) has referred the following …

S.C : The interest on debentures cannot be equated with advancement of loans and thereby, not chargeable to Interest Tax under the Interest Tax Act, 1974

Supreme Court Of India CIT, Gandhinagar vs. Gujarat Industrial Investment Corp. Section : 2(7) Ranjan Gogoi And Prafulla C. Pant, JJ. Civil Appeal Nos. 1665-1670 Of 2016 September 29, 2016 ORDER 1. Four questions were framed by the High Court for adjudication in the appeals before it under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act. The …

Delhi H.C : Nature of transaction and appropriate filter determines elements that are to be considered in TNMM and therefore, costs, sales and assets employed wherever relevant are to be applied

High Court Of Delhi Pr.CIT, Delhi vs. Saxo India (P.) Ltd. Section : 92C Assessment Year  : 2011-12 Ravindra Bhat And Ms. Deepa Sharma, JJ. IT Appeal Nos. 682 (Delhi) Of 2016 C.M. Appl. Nos. 35744-35746 Of 2016 September  28, 2016 ORDER 1. The question of law urged by the revenue in this appeal is with respect …

Karnataka H.C : Sale consideration received by the assessee would be entitled to benefit under Sec.54 of the Income Tax Act, even though the sale was not completed and possession handed over to the assessee within two years as per Sec.54 of the Income Tax Act, is perverse, arbitrary and contrary to law

High Court Of Karnataka CIT, Bangalore vs. Mrs. Shakuntala Devi Section 54 Assessment Year 2003-04 Jayant Patel And Aravind Kumar, JJ. IT Appeal No. 340 Of 2009 September 28, 2016 JUDGMENT Aravind Kumar, J. – Revenue has preferred this appeal questioning the correctness and legality of the order passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench …

Punjab & Haryana H.C : The notice dated 24.10.2014, issued under Section 148

High Court Of Punjab And Haryana Franchise India Holdings Ltd. vs. ACIT, Circle, Chandigarh Section : 40(a)(ia),147 Assessment Year 2010-11 S.J. Vazifdar, CJ And Deepak Sibal, J. CWP No. 12322/2015 September 28, 2016 JUDGMENT Deepak Sibal, J. – The present petition has been filed at the instance of the assessee seeking therein quashing of the notice …

Bombay H.C : The Tribunal erred in excluding FCS Software Solutions from the list of comparables by considering RPT % with respect to sales income only with RPT constitutes both sales as well as expenses

High Court Of Bombay CIT-II, Pune vs. PTC Software (I) (P.) Ltd. Section 92C Assessment year 2007-08 M.S. Sanklecha And S.C. Gupte, JJ. IT Appeal No. 732 Of 2014 September  26, 2016 ORDER 1. This Appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) challenges the order dated 30th April, 2013 passed by the …

Gujarat H.C : Bogus purchases from Shri F.H. Rizvi and h is associates, a bogus concerns in the nature of non-existing agencies, were disallowed and added to total income, G.P. should invariably be increased and hence the difference of percentage of G.P. is required to be added to the total income computed under section 143(3)

High Court Of Gujarat Synbiotics Ltd. vs. Union of India Section : 145 Assessment year : 1993-94 Akil Kureshi And A.J. Shastri, JJ. Special Civil Application Nos. 5813 And 5815 Of 2004 September 26, 2016 JUDGMENT Akil Kureshi, J. – These petitions arise in common background and involve the same assessee. We may notice the facts …
Malcare WordPress Security