Income Tax Judgements

Held by the Hon`ble Court that as the amounts set apart by the assessee for different A.Y. are done on the basis of past experience even though the liability is to be quantified and discharged in future, the provision made for the liability against w

Held by the Ho"ble Bench that section 54 does not prohibit from purchasing property in a foreign country however all other conditions should be satisfied.The Bench also observed that the assessee should be the absolute owner of the new property in or

. On a writ petition filed by the assessee challenging the seizure of certain jewellery and ornaments belonging to the assessee, the High Court held that the search and seizure were invalid and illegal. The High Court ordered that interest at t

Held by Ho"ble court that since the incentive bonus was paid to the employees wholly and exclusively for business purposes such bonus was allowable as deduction u/s 37(1).

Held by the Hon`ble Court that, the A.O. must be satisfied, not arbitrarily but judiciously. In the facts and circumstances of the case, penalty levied on technical mistake committed by the assessee and due to this there is no loss of revenue, shall

Held by the Hon`ble Court that, if it be assumed that the subscribers of application money were not genuine, under no circumstances amount of share application money could be regarded as undisclosed income of the company. Therefore share application

Advance Ruling - Transfer of shares between two non-resident entities abroad

Held by the Hon`ble Court that, no authority has been given to assessing officer u/s 142(2A) of the Income tax Act to make an order for preparation of fresh books by referring the matter to an auditor under special audit. Therefore A.O. is not justif

Held by the Hob`ble Authority that as per article 13(5) of the DTAA between India & Netherlands in case of corporate reorganisation where the transferor or transferee owned atleast 10% of the capital of the other, the capital gain on such transfers c

Held by the Hon`ble Court that, the Tribunal misread and misapplied rules, 19 and 20 of the 1963 Rules in holding that the assessee`s appeal not maintainable. Tribunal could have proceeded hearing the appeal ex-parte as per rule 24 but that was not d