389 ITR – taxcaselaw.com

S.C : Application for oral hearing is rejected.

Supreme Court Of India Preetam Singh Luthra vs. CIT-II Section 28(i) Assessment Year 2006-07 Ranjan Gogoi And Prafulla C. Pant, JJ. Review Petition (Civil) No. 3653 Of 2016 Civil Appeal No. 7169 Of 2016 November 30, 2016 ORDER 1. Delay condoned. 2. Application for oral hearing is rejected. 3. This Review Petition has been filed against …

S.C : ‘salary amount’ on which interest would be chargeable/leviable under Section 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961

Supreme Court Of India Ian Peter Morris vs. ACIT Section 234B, 234C Ranjan Gogoi And N.V. Ramana, JJ. Special Leave To Appeal (C) No. 1196-1197 Of 2013 And Civil Appeal No. 11385-11386 Of 2016 November 29, 2016 ORDER 1. Leave granted. 2. The appellant – Assessee along with three others had promoted a Company, namely, ‘Log …

S.C : The Assessee has been subjected to payment of income-tax on capital gains accruing from land acquisition compensation and sale of land

Supreme Court Of India Ashok Prapann Sharma vs. CIT Section : 55, 48, 260A Assessment Year : 1989-90 Ranjan Gogoi And N.V. Ramana, JJ. Civil Appeal No. 2314 Of 2007 November 24, 2016 ORDER 1. The Assessment Year in question is 1989-1990. The Assessee has been subjected to payment of income-tax on capital gains accruing from …

Madras H.C : The Central Board of Direct Taxes for rejecting the application seeking condonation of delay is spelt out in paragraph 4 of its order

High Court Of Madras CBDT vs. Regen Infrastructure & Services (P.) Ltd. Section 139, 119 Nooty. Ramamohana Rao And Dr. Anita Sumanth, JJ. Writ Appeal No. 1314 Of 2016 C.M.P. No. 17100 Of 2016 November 1, 2016 JUDGMENT Nooty. Ramamohana Rao, J. – This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the order rendered by the learned …

Kerala H.C : the reassessment proceedings in the case of the assessee is not valid under law in light of the fact that there has been no full and true disclosure of material necessary for assessment during the original assessment proceedings

High Court Of Kerala CIT, Thiruvananthapuram vs. Hindustan Latex Ltd. Section : 80-I, 80HH, 147 Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan And Devan Ramachandran, JJ. IT Appeal No. 92 Of 2010 October 27, 2016 JUDGMENT Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J. – This income tax appeal by the Department stands admitted on 30.09.2013 formulating the following as the substantial questions of …

Delhi H.C : Royalty and technical assistance fee did not form part of a composite transaction and have to be treated as two separate transactions for the purpose of benchmarking and computing arms length price

High Court Of Delhi Magneti Marelli Powertrain India (P.) Ltd. vs. DCIT Section : 92C Assessment Year 2008-09 S. Ravindra Bhat And Ms. Deepa Sharma, JJ. IT Appeal No. 350 Of 2014 October 25, 2016 JUDGMENT S. Ravindra Bhat, J. – The assessee appeals, under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act (“the Act” hereafter) against …

Bombay H.C : The Tribunal was justified in upholding the order of the CIT(A) in deleting the addition of Long Term Capital Gain of Rs.80,58,000/- on the ground that provisions of section 50C of the IT Act, 1961 were not applicable to transfer of land and building, being a leasehold property

High Court Of Bombay CIT, Central-II, Mumbai vs. Greenfield Hotels & Estates (P.) Ltd. Section : 50C, 2(14), 45 Assessment Year 2007-08 M.S. Sanklecha And S.C. Gupte, JJ. IT Appeal No. 735 Of 2014 October 24, 2016 ORDER 1. This appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) challenges the order dated …

Punjab & Haryana H.C : The Hon’ble ITAT was right in law in directing the Assessing Officer to compute the deduction u/s 80 IA by following the method in section 80 HHC (3) for working out profit/loss from trading goods

High Court Of Punjab And Haryana CIT-III, Ludhiana vs. Nahar Exports Ltd. Section : 268A Assessment Year : 1998-99 S.J. Vazifdar, CJ. And Darshan Singh, J. IT Appeal No. 253 Of 2007 (O & M) October 19, 2016 JUDGMENT S.J. Vazifdar, CJ. – This is an appeal against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal …

S.C : The assessees are attempting the wriggle out from payment of capital gain tax on the ground that it was a “slump sale” within the meaning of Section 2(42C)

Supreme Court Of India Vatsala Shenoy vs. JCIT (Assessment), Mysore Section 45, 50B Assessment Year 1995-96 A.K. Sikri And N.V. Ramana, JJ. Civil Appeal Nos. 1234 To 1245 Of 2012 October 18, 2016 JUDGMENT A.K. Sikri, J. – Delay condoned in Special Leave Petition (C) No CC 9101 and 10193 of 2014. 2. Leave granted. 3. …

Bombay H.C : The assessee was not entitled to claim weighted deduction under Section 35B

High Court Of Bombay Bombay Suburban Electric Supply Ltd. vs. CIT, Bombay City VI Section 35B Assessment Year 1979-80 M.S. Sanklecha And S.C. Gupte, JJ. IT Reference No. 76 Of 1998 October 13, 2016 JUDGEMENT S.C. Gupte, J. – In this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“Act”), the Income Tax Appellate …

Tag: 389 ITR