Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Case Laws
Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Section Wise HC Income Tax - HC
Law
Court
Citation -
Landmark
Order by
 

 

Income Tax - High Court - Case Laws

Showing 1 to 20 of 45510 Records

  • 2017 (12) TMI 590 - DELHI HIGH COURT

    Maruti Udyog Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi

    Allowable deduction under Section 43B - Disallowance of the amount deposited by the Appellant in its Central Excise Personal Ledger Account (PLA) before 31st March 2000, i.e. the end of the relevant accounting year - Held that - The Court is of the view that the above decision of this Court in the Assessee s own case for AYs 1995-96 and 1996-97 2012 (12) TMI 671 - DELHI HIGH COURT covers the issue in favour of the Assessee - For the purpose of cl....... + More


  • 2017 (12) TMI 587 - DELHI HIGH COURT

    SC Johnson Products Private Limited Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 22 (2) , New Delhi

    Reassessment notices under Sections 147/148 - scheme of amalgamation - Held that - In the present case, there is no doubt that this court had, while accepting the scheme for amalgamation, facially accepted the method which the assessee indicated. At that stage, neither did the court conduct any detailed inquiry into the question of the appropriateness of the method, nor was it competent to return findings that would have been conclusive. This eve....... + More


  • 2017 (12) TMI 586 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

    Dr. R.A. Verma, Medical Officer Versus Commissioner of Income Tax, Allahabad

    Disallowance of agricultural income - Held that - We find that in the facts of the present case the assessment has been made for the Assessment Year 1998-99 purely on the basis guess work and is not supported by any evidence and material on record. The evidence relied upon by the learned counsel for the revenue in the shape of reply as filed by the assessee cannot constitute an admission on the part of the assessee having indulged in private prac....... + More


  • 2017 (12) TMI 585 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

    M/s Kanpur Texel (P) Limited Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-4, Kanpur And Another

    Reopening of assessment - reason to believe - Held that - The reassessment proceedings initiated against the petitioner for the Assessment Year 2009-10 are barred on two counts i.e. for non-compliance of the first proviso of Section 147; also no tangible material exists in support of the belief recorded by the Assessing Officer that income had escaped assessment. Consequently, reason (to be formed by the assessing authority) that is a sine-qua-no....... + More


  • 2017 (12) TMI 584 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT

    Amit Basu Proprietor M/s Global Vision Company Versus The DCIT, Circle-II, NCRB, Statue Circle, Jaipur

    Entitlement to deduction u/s 10BA - denial of claim on the premises that on account of revised return filed by the appellant, it had not claimed exemption u/s 10BA - whether return filed u/s 139(5) is revised return and return filed on 7.5.2008 Annexure-5 can be allowed to be withdrawn vide letter dt. 7.9.2009? - Held that - On a close reading of Sub-Sec.(5) of Sec.139, it is very clear that the legislature has given a chance to the assessee to c....... + More


  • 2017 (12) TMI 583 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT

    M/s Vaibhav Global Limited formerly known as Vaibhav Gems Limited Versus Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur-II, Jaipur And Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5, Jaipur

    Benefit of Section 92B - Held that - Taking into account the observations made in Hindalco Industries Ltd. Vs.ACIT 2011 (12) TMI 227 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT the first issue is answered in favour of the assessee and against the department. Tribunal while relying on the international transaction granted benefit of Section 92B to the assessee which is just and proper. - Regarding LIBOR rate plus 2 on account of interest free loans provided by the appell....... + More


  • 2017 (12) TMI 582 - KERALA HIGH COURT

    Subhash Chandran P Versus The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) And Income Tax Officer, Ward-I (3) , Thiruvananthapuram

    Denial of opportunity of hearing before Ext.P7 order - no response to the notice - stay of recovery of the tax due from the appellant subject to his remitting 50 thereof - Held that - From a reading of Ext.P7, we are not persuaded to accept the contentions because Ext.P7 itself shows that notice dated 16.05.2017 fixing the hearing on 12.06.2017 was issued to the appellant. It is also seen that finding that there was no response to the notice, ano....... + More


  • 2017 (12) TMI 536 - DELHI HIGH COURT

    Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi Versus Maruti Udyog Ltd.

    Addition u/s 43B - unutilized MODVAT credit of earlier years adjustment - Held that - This question is answered in the negative, i.e. in favour of the Revenue and against the Assessee. See Maruti Udyog Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi 2017 (12) TMI 590 - DELHI HIGH COURT - Addition u/s 43B - sales tax paid on raw material and computers in the preceding assessment years - Held that -Sales tax paid on raw material in the preceding AY w....... + More


  • 2017 (12) TMI 475 - DELHI HIGH COURT

    Sunbeam Auto Private Limited Versus Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax

    Application under Section 264 - treatment to sales tax subsidy - AO had added back the sales tax subsidy received by the Assessee as a revenue receipt thereby rejecting its plea that it had to be treated as a capital receipt - Held that - The scheme under which the Petitioner received the said subsidy also formed the subject matter of appeal filed by Johnson Matthey India (P) Limited 2014 (8) TMI 800 - ITAT DELHI referring to the decision of the ....... + More


  • 2017 (12) TMI 474 - DELHI HIGH COURT

    Commissioner Of Income Tax, Delhi Versus Maruti Suzuki India Ltd

    TDS u/s 195 - Disallowing the payment under Section 40 (a)(i) for failure to deduct TDS - Held that - Section 40 (a) (i) could not be invoked to disallow such payment as deduction on the ground that no TDS under Section 195 (1) was deducted from such payment. Further the CBDT Circular No. 23 dated 23rd July 1969 stated that A foreign agent of an Indian exporter operates in his own country and no part of his income arises in India. It acknowledges....... + More


  • 2017 (12) TMI 425 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    M/s. EBR Enterprises and Another Versus Union of India through the Secretary and Others

    Applications u/s 264 for revision in favor of assessee - Condonation of delay - eligible reasons for delay - Held that - Referring to case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others 1987 (2) TMI 61 - SUPREME Court it was not necessary for the petitioner to have explained each and every day s delay. On the contrary, the Apex Court held that when substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, the ca....... + More


  • 2017 (12) TMI 414 - DELHI HIGH COURT

    Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi Versus Maruti Suzuki India Ltd.

    Addition u/s 43B - Custom Duty paid on import of components which were used for export by the end of the year - Held that - ITAT 2011 (8) TMI 1147 - ITAT DELHI was correct in deleting the addition applying provisions of section 43B in respect of the Custom Duty paid on import of components which were used for export by the end of the year. - Decided in favour of assessee........ + More


  • 2017 (12) TMI 413 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

    Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Mohd. Sahid Prop. M/s Azim Builders

    Valuation of closing stock - methods of accounting - Held that - Tribunal has again not committed any error in rejecting the foundation of valuation made by the assessing officer. In so far as it has noted that the total sale turnover of the residential units made by the assessee was irrelevant inasmuch as the sales of different units had been made in different years and the same could not be clubbed together to apply the gross profit rate theret....... + More


  • 2017 (12) TMI 412 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

    M/s. Advantage Strategic Consulting Private Limited Versus The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

    Transfer of case u/s 127 - Centralization of Search and Seizure cases - violation of principles of natural justice - recording of reasons - Held that - Sub-section (3) of Section 127 of the Act does not commence with a non-obstante clause, but rather it excludes certain procedure contemplated under sub-section (1) and sub-section (2) of Section 127 of the Act, when both the transferee and transferor officers are situated in the same city, localit....... + More


  • 2017 (12) TMI 411 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

    The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai Versus N. Ragunath

    Depreciation on temporary wooden structure for interior decoration effected to the buildings and the showrooms - Held that - In order to bring into existence the showroom of a particular brand, the assessee carried out certain specific interior works involving interiors, furniture and equipment in the premises, which was leased out to the assessee and that the interior decoration works were carried out in line with the specifications of the brand....... + More


  • 2017 (12) TMI 410 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT

    Pr Commissioner of Income Tax Versus M/s Satyam Food Specialities Pvt. Ltd. (Now Known As Karmic Budiness Specialities Pvt. Ltd.)

    Addition on account of amount received by the assessee towards settlement compensation - revenue or capital receipt - Held that - Compensation in question was meant, intended and paid for withdrawal of aforesaid litigation instituted by assessee which could have resulted in many adverse consequences for the reputation of Coca Cola/Atlantic besides entailing huge cost and efforts of litigation. Relinquishment of right to sue is neither a capital a....... + More


  • 2017 (12) TMI 409 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT

    Daniel Merchants Private Limited & Another Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward - 9 (1) Kolkata & Another

    Revision u/s 263 - Held that - The assessee seeks to raise certain points of law in this appeal which were subject matters before this Court in four appeals already decided and in all the four appeals it was found that the questions raised were not substantial questions of law. These decisions are Rajmandir Estates Private Limited Vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata-III reported in (2016 (5) TMI 801 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT), M/s. Prag....... + More


  • 2017 (12) TMI 370 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

    Sh. Rajnish Jain Versus Commissioner of Income Tax & Another

    Reopening of assessment - surrender of income - Held that - In the first place, the validity of the reassessment proceedings was not an issue raised by the assessee before the Tribunal. That issue had been decided against the assessee by the CIT (Appeals) which part of the order was not challenged in appeal before the Tribunal. Then, as to the addition made on merits, we find that the assessee had himself admitted to have written to the assessing....... + More


  • 2017 (12) TMI 369 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

    The Commissioner of Income Tax Bareilly And Another Versus M/s Associated Metals Co. Ltd.

    Deemed dividend addition u/s 2(22)(e) - Held that - From the plain reading of Section 2(22)(e) it transpires the legislature seeks to tax certain payments made by specified persons as deemed dividend by treating such payments to be dividend payment on notional basis. Mere issuance of a cheque that was subsequently cancelled and returned without ever being ever presented for encashment and without any money having been paid against the same to the....... + More


  • 2017 (12) TMI 368 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

    M/s Prem Castings (P) Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)

    Addition u/s 68 - ingenuity of transaction - Held that - Assessee is a private limited company and it being further admitted to it that the alleged investors were close friends and business associates of its directors and/or share holders, as the case may be, the burden rested squarely on the assessee to disclose true and correct details of the persons it claimed had made the substantial investments of ₹ 3.46 crores. That burden was not dis....... + More


1........
 
 
 
Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version