Delhi High CourtLoans Extended By NOIDA Is Not Commercial Activity, Eligible For Section 10(46) Exemption: Delhi High CourtCase Title: New Okhla Industrial Development Authority Versus Union Of India & Ors.The Delhi High Court has held that the loans and advances extended by the New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (NOIDA) are not commercial activities and are eligible for...
Delhi High Court
Case Title: New Okhla Industrial Development Authority Versus Union Of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court has held that the loans and advances extended by the New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (NOIDA) are not commercial activities and are eligible for exemption under Section 10(46) of the Income Tax Act.
TPO Lacks Jurisdiction To Question Commercial Expediency Or Genuineness Of Need: Delhi High Court
Case Title: PCIT Versus Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd.
The Delhi High Court has held that the statutory authority conferred upon the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) can only extend to an examination of the appropriateness of the method adopted for the purposes of determining arm's length pricing (ALP) or evaluating the enlistment of comparables. However, the TPO would neither be justified nor could it be countenanced to have the jurisdiction to question commercial expediency or genuineness of need.
Bombay High Court
Case Title: ACIT Versus Sociedade de Fomento Industrial Pvt. Ltd.
The Bombay High Court at Goa, while upholding the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), has held that the assessee cannot be expected to deduct tax at source from payments that became taxable owing to a retrospective amendment.
Case Title: Smt. Sunita Purushottam Virgincar Versus ITO
The Bombay High Court at Goa has held that the reassessment notice issued without complying with the pre-conditions mentioned in Section 148 of the Income Tax Act was beyond jurisdiction.
Karnataka High Court
Case Title: Suresh Chatrabhoj Bhanushali Versus UOI
The Karnataka High Court has granted an interim stay on a reassessment notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which was not issued in terms of the procedure prescribed under Faceless Assessment.
Kerala High Court
Decision By Income Tax Officer Who Did Not Hear The Case; Kerala High Court Quashes The Order
Case Title: Sri. Johnson Koomullil Thomas Versus The Income Tax Officer
The Kerala High Court has held that if the income tax officer who hears the case does not render the decision, it would amount to a violation of the principles of natural justice.
Case Title: Aaron Construction Co. Versus Union Of India
The Kerala High Court has held that the non-filing of returns even after receipt of the assessment order is fatal for the assessee.
Calcutta High Court
Case Title: Vodafone Idea Limited Vs Comissioner Of Income Tax
The Calcutta High Court has held that the cellular mobile service providers are not obliged to deduct the tax at source (TDS) on income received by distributors/franchisees from customers.
Gujarat High Court
Admission Fee Charged From Students Forms Part Of Corpus Donation: Gujarat High Court
Case Title: N H Kapadia Education Trust Versus The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions)
The Gujarat High Court has held that the admission fee charged by the students forms part of the corpus donation of the trust.
Telangana High Court
Case Title: M/s.Pipelic Energy Software India Pvt.Ltd. Versus The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
The Telangana High Court has held that deductions cannot be availed on expenditures incurred for overseeing the project of holding a company.
Meghalaya High Court
Case Title: Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Shillong Versus M/s North Eastern Electric Power Corporation Limited
The Meghalaya High Court has held that once the revision order becomes final, no question of passing another order will arise.
ITAT
Income Tax Addition Can't Be Made On Cash Deposits During Demonetization Period: Delhi ITAT
Case Title: Durga Fire Work Versus ITO
The Delhi Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that the department is precluded from making any addition under Section 68 of the Income Act in respect of the cash deposits made into bank accounts during the demonetization period.
Scrip Can't Be Called Penny Stock When Shares Retained For More Than 10 Years; ITAT Deletes Addition
Case Title: M/s. Elara India Opportunities Fund Limited Versus Dy. CIT (International Taxation)- 2(2)(1)
The Mumbai Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), while deleting the addition, held that scrip cannot be called penny stock when shares are retained for more than 10 years.
Case Title: ITO Versus Neetaben Snehalkumar Patel
The Ahmedabad Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that the provision of Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act is intended to only rectify the mistake apparent from the records, and the power of Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act cannot be utilized to recall and review the order on its merit.