Feedback   New User   Subscription   Demo   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
Case Laws
Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax Section Wise HC Income Tax - HC
Citation -
Order by


Income Tax - High Court - Case Laws

Showing 1 to 20 of 45967 Records

  • 2018 (2) TMI 1538 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT

    Reopening of assessment - deduction u/s 80IB(10) allowability - Held that - There is no allegation by the department that during the year under consideration i.e. the assessment year 2010-2011, the petitioner made any allotment of residential units in breach of conditions. AO as per the reasons recorded wishes to reexamine the petitioner s claim of deduction of ₹ 1.10 crores u/s 80IB(10) for the said assessment year on the premise that that....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 1537 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT

    Application u/s 119(2) - condoning the delay in filing the return for the assessment year 2009-2010 - claim of refund - Held that - In case of Karta of HUF in his individual capacity under identical circumstances, application for condonation of delay based on identical grounds came to be accepted by the Revenue. In same set of facts and same situation, there cannot be a differential treatment. - Merely because one application was decided by the C....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 1536 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT

    Reopening of assessment - cost of improvement not reflected in the accounts of the assessee - Held that - As is apparent from the petitioner s response to the Assessing Officer dated 15.12.2014, pertained to the sale of the property in question. We may recall, the petitioner had sold agricultural land situated at village Hathijan during the said year. In his written communication dated 15.12.2014, the petitioner pointed out to the Assessing Offic....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 1535 - DELHI HIGH COURT

    MAT computation - whether lease equalization charges can be deducted while computing book profit - Held that - Capital recovery can be known, as is evident, on deduction of financing charges from the lease rentals. In sum and substance, lease equalization charges is a method of re-calibrating the depreciation claimed by the assessee in a given accounting period. The method employed by the assessee, therefore, over the full term of the lease perio....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 1534 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT

    Reopening of assessment - Addition u/s 68 - independent application of mind - Held that - Proviso added by the Finance Act 2012 with effect from 1.4.2013 to Section 68 says where the assessee is a company and the sum so credited consists of share application money, share capital, share premium or any such amount by whatever name called, explanation offered by the assessee company shall be deemed to be not satisfactory, unless the person in whose ....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 1533 - DELHI HIGH COURT

    Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - period of limitation - Held that - The dependence of the period of the limitation upon whether an order becomes final at the instance of one party, i.e. that filing and prosecution or withdrawal of an appeal (by one party or the other) would be, in the opinion of the Court one such event which leaves the legal position inchoate and unsatisfactory. Instead, an interpretation that permits certainty should be adopted. CIT s o....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 1532 - DELHI HIGH COURT

    Deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) - assessee claimed the amount received as guarantee fee for advance received from Ginza - Held that - All indications were that the assessee was sanguine and assured about the nature of the amount given by Ginza, i.e. that it could use it for its own purposes as it did by advancing substantial amounts at commercial rates of interest which could not be conceivably attributable to short term deposits and also for the pu....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 1531 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT

    Reopening of assessment - Claim of the deduction u/s 80IA 4 - eligibility of reasons to believe - doctrine of merger - Held that - AO passed assessment order on 12th March 2015 and in such order, he disallowed the entire claim under Section 80IA 4 of the Act. That being the position, he had no occasion to separately comment on the assessee s claim of expenditure. The assessee carried such matter in appeal and CIT A , by an Order dated 26th July 2....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 1530 - DELHI HIGH COURT

    Addition of receipts as share premium and call in arrears - CIT and the ITAT were of the opinion that though the features of the case were unusual and the call arrears were liquidated after 10 years, equally the assessee was a public limited company and could not be expected to keep track of its individual shareholders and their details - Held that - While initially the addition based upon the Assessing Officer s assessment of the facts were prem....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 1529 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

    Revision u/s 263 - benefit of deduction u/s 80-IA(4)(iv)(c) allowability - Held that - As regards the rental income, it is also required to be observed that it is an independent income having no direct nexus towards reimbursement of manufacturing or selling expenses, in the absence of the fact that the assessee was paying rent of staff quarters which was debited to profit and loss account. Thus it cannot be construed as income derived from the in....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 1528 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    Non acceptance of declaration filed by the Petitioner under Section 88 of the Samadhan Scheme - determination of amount of tax payable under Section 90(1) - Held that - The Affidavit in Reply dated 9th April 1999 by the Respondent No.1 the Designated Authority itself in terms states that it has worked out the amount payable for the purpose of certificate dated 3 February 1999 by first adjusting the part payment made towards interest and only ther....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 1473 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT

    Reopening of assessment - eligibility to deduction u/s 10B - eligibility of reasons to believe - change of opinion - Held that - The assessment in question was framed without scrutiny when the assessee s return was accepted under section 143(1). AO had objections to the assessee s claim of deduction under section 10A of the Act. Similar claims made by the assessee for the assessment years 2009-2010 and 2011-2012 were not accepted by the Assessing....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 1472 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

    Deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) - Held that - The Tribunal has taken a view rightly that a deemed dividend could only have been assessed in the hands of a person who is shareholder of the lender company and not in the hands of the borrowing concern in which such shareholder is a member or partner having substantial interest. Admittedly, in the present case the assessee-company was not a shareholder of the lender company. But, in this case both the l....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 1471 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT

    Reopening of assessment - reasons to believe - Held that - AO in the reasons recorded, proceeded on the erroneous footing that the assessee had not filed return at all. The first premise for issuing the notice was thus factually incorrect. It is now not disputed by the Revenue that the assessee did file return of income for the year under consideration which was duly acknowledged by the Department. The entire reasoning thus proceeded on the wrong....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 1470 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

    Stay on demand - Held that - Though normally this Court will not interfere in writ jurisdiction against said interlocutory orders passed by the Appellate Authority, which is seized of the appeal before it, but in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and looking to the fact that the appeal itself is coming up for final hearing after its pre-ponement of date on 09.04.2018 itself, and on which date it is expected that the learned....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 1469 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    Issue of taxability of the sale tax exemption benefit availed by assessee - Held that - At this stage of our dictation, Mr. Chhotaray interjected to mention that it should be Assessing Officer / Inspector and not Assessing Officer alone. This is contrary to what was stated to us during the hearing. In fact, we were categorically told by Mr. Chhotaray that he has met the Assessing Officer twice and he was informed by him that no order has been pas....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 1468 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

    Claim for written back of excess provision for bad and doubtful debts - Held that - If an allowance or deduction has been made in the assessment for any year in respect of loss, expenditure or trading liability and the same is written back in the books of accounts, the said written back expenditure, loss or trading liability shall be eligible to levy of tax as income. The burden lies on the Revenue to prove that the provision for bad and doubtful....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 1467 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    Penalty u/s 271D - reasonable cause for violation of Section 269SS - Tribunal partly allowed the Appeal by restoring the issue of amounts received in cash from agriculturists to the Assessing Officer to verify whether the agriculturists were not having banking facilities so as to delete the penalty under Section 271 D - Held that - The law provides that the breach of Section 269 SS invites penalty under Section 271 D. The aforesaid breach has no ....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 1466 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Reopening of assessment - reason recorded for reopening of the assessment was the claim for donation under Section 35(1) - Held that - Held that - It is undisputed that when filing of return of income on 12 February 2008, consequent to reopening notice, the Respondent had not made a claim deduction of ₹ 1.00 Crore for donation, inspite of donation made to M/s. Indian Medical Scientific Research Foundation, Agra. The ....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 1465 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT

    Adjustment of refund against next assessment year - Held that - According to the counsel for the petitioner thus, after the adjustment for the refund of the earlier year, the deposit towards disputed tax liability for the current year would exceed 20 . Counsel for the Revenue do not dispute this factual assertion of the petitioner. - In view of these developments, no further relief would be needed to enable the petitioner to enjoy the stay pendin....... + More

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new


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

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

Go to Mobile Version