Category: Direct Taxation

Income Tax Act, 1961 – Section 80-O – Deduction – Income received in foreign exchange – Whether the income received by the appellants in foreign exchange, for the services provided by them to foreign enterprises, qualifies for deduction under Section 80-O of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as applicable during the respective assessment years from 1993-94 to 1997-98 – Held, NO. Appeal dismissed

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAMNATH AND COMPANY — Appellant Vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar and Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. )…

Tax Authorities Can’t Give Their Own Interpretations To Legislative Provisions On Perception Of Trade Practices : SC HELD There is no concept of ‘constructive delivery’ of goods under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, and inter-state movement of goods will terminate only when physical delivery is taken.

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH COMMERCIAL TAXES OFFICER — Appellant Vs. M/S. BOMBAY MACHINERY STORE — Respondent ( Before : Deepak Gupta and Aniruddha Bose, JJ. ) Civil…

Income Tax Act, 1961 – Section 194E – Payments made to the Non-Resident Sports Associations in the present case represented their income which accrued or arose or was deemed to have accrued or arisen in India. Consequently, the Appellant was liable to deduct Tax at Source in terms of Section 194E of the Act. Decided on : 29-04-2020

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PILCOM — Appellant Vs. C.I.T. WEST BENGAL-VII — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit and Vineet Saran, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No.…

In Partial Relief To Vodafone Idea, SC Allows Tax Refund Of Rs 773 Crores Held that since the statute now envisages exercise of power of withholding of refund in a particular manner, it goes without saying that for assessment year commencing after 01.04.2017 the requirements of Section 241-A of the Act must be satisfied.

In Partial Relief To Vodafone Idea, SC Allows Tax Refund Of Rs 773 Crores [Read Judgment] Mehal Jain 29 April 2020 2:48 PM GMT In a setback of sorts to…

Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement – Articles 5(3)(e) and 7 – Liability to tax under DTAA – Meaning of expressions “business connection” and “business activity” has been articulated. HELD And since by a legal fiction it is deemed not to be a PE of the respondent in India, it is not amenable to tax liability in terms of Article 7 of the DTAA – High Court justly reckoned the same as being of preparatory or auxiliary character, falling under Article 5(3)(e) – Appeal dismissed.

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. U.A.E. EXCHANGE CENTRE — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar and Ajay Rastogi, JJ. )…

SC Upholds The Constitutional Validity of Clause(f) of Section 43B of Income Tax Act, 1961 HELD that clause (f) seeks to mitigate a mischief i.e. the absence of this clause would entail in a double benefit to the employer- advance deduction from tax liability without any burden of actual payment and refusal to pay as and when occasion arises.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. EXIDE INDUSTRIES LIMITED AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar, Hemant Gupta and Dinesh…

Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 143(2) – HELD the factual basis on which the Officer formed his opinion in the assessment order dated 30.11.2000 (for assessment year 1998-1999), in regard to addition of Rs.2,26,000/- (Rupees two lakhs twenty six thousand only), stands dispelled by the affidavits and statements of the concerned unregistered dealers in penalty proceedings. That now being the indisputable position, it must necessarily follow that the addition of Rs.2,26,000/- cannot be justified,

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BASIR AHMED SISODIYA — Appellant Vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar and Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. ) Civil…

Income Tax – Doctrine of mutuality – The doctrine of mutuality bestows a special status to qualify for exemption from tax liability – It is a settled proposition of law that exemptions are to be put to strict interpretation – The appellant having failed to fulfil the stipulations and to prove the existence of mutuality, the question of extending exemption from tax liability to the appellant, that too at the cost of public exchequer, does not arise

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH YUM! RESTAURANTS (MARKETING) PRIVATE LIMITED — Appellant Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar and Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ.…

NDTV TAX CASE : Income Tax Act, 1961 – Sections 147 proviso 2 and 148 – Scrutiny Notice – If the revenue is to rely upon the second proviso and wanted to urge that the limitation of 16 years would apply, then in opinion in the notice or at least in the reasons in support of the notice, the assessee should have been put to notice that the revenue relies upon the second proviso HELD We accordingly allow the appeal by holding that the notice issued to the assessee shows sufficient reasons to believe on the part of the assessing officer to reopen the assessment but since the revenue has failed to show non-disclosure of facts the notice having been issued after a period of 4 years is required to be quashed.Therefore, the revenue may issue fresh notice taking benefit of the second proviso if otherwise permissible under law.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NEW DELHI TELEVISION LIMITED — Appellant Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao and Deepak Gupta, JJ.…

You missed

“Husband Has No Right On Wife’s Stridhan” Matrimonial Law – The appeal concerns a matrimonial dispute involving misappropriation of gold jewellery and monetary gifts – The appellant, a widow, married the first respondent, a divorcee, and alleged misappropriation of her jewelry and money by the respondents – The core issue is whether the appellant established the misappropriation of her gold jewellery by the respondents and if the High Court erred in its judgment – The appellant claimed that her jewellery was taken under the pretext of safekeeping on her wedding night and misappropriated by the respondents to settle their financial liabilities – The respondents denied the allegations, stating no dowry was demanded and that the appellant had custody of her jewellery, which she took to her paternal home six days after the marriage – The Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s judgment, upheld the Family Court’s decree, and awarded the appellant Rs. 25,00,000 as compensation for her misappropriated stridhan – The Court found the High Court’s approach legally unsustainable, criticizing it for demanding a criminal standard of proof and basing findings on assumptions not supported by evidence – The Court emphasized the civil standard of proof as the balance of probabilities and noted that the appellant’s claim for return of stridhan does not require proof of acquisition – The Supreme Court concluded that the appellant had established a more probable case and directed the first respondent to pay the compensation within six months, with a 6% interest per annum in case of default.