Case BriefsSupreme Court

Supreme Court noted that the ‘interest' only follows the ‘principal', therefore, the ‘principal' being the payable tax, resulted into no liability to pay the tax along with return. Consequently, held that there is no liability to pay interest if there was no liability to pay the tax.

Invocation of incorrect methodology
Case BriefsSupreme Court

Supreme Court held that the CBEC circular was not contrary to the intent of the Central Excise Act and Rules. Thus, the show cause notice is not defective and unenforceable. However, the order of the Commissioner regarding the value of the goods sold to the Assessee’s sister concerns is in consonance with the Court’s earlier judgments and CBEC Circular.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT)
Case BriefsTribunals/Commissions/Regulatory Bodies

ITAT upheld the order of the CIT and said that the assessee had only provided treatment to a few patients at concessional rates, which was less than 1% of the revenue of the assessee. Thus, the activities of the assessee cannot be said to be charitable activities and it is not entitled for registration or approval under section 10(23C) or 12A of the Income Tax Act.

Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Delhi High Court: On a question of law before the Court that whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (‘ITAT’) erred in law

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal
Case BriefsTribunals/Commissions/Regulatory Bodies

    Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), New Delhi: While deciding the instant appeal pertaining to the Assessment Year 2015-16 where the

Meghalaya High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Meghalaya High Court: The Division Bench of Sanjib Banerjee, CJ. and W. Diengdoh, J. disposed of a petition holding that the assessee

Calcutta High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Calcutta High Court: The Division Bench of Debangsu Basak and Bibhas Ranjan De, JJ. disposed of a appeal which was directed against

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Delhi High Court: The Division Bench of Manmohan and Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, JJ., expressed that, merely because there was a delay

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Orissa High Court: A Division Bench of S. Muralidhar CJ and R. K. Pattanaik J. dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee

Case BriefsSupreme Court

It is essential to look beyond the mere concept of destruction of corporate entity which brings to an end or terminates any assessment proceedings.

Case BriefsSupreme Court

Supreme Court: The bench of UU Lalit and S. Ravindra Bhat*, JJ has held that the declaration under the Income Declaration Scheme

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal
Case BriefsTribunals/Commissions/Regulatory Bodies

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), New Delhi: The Coram of Amit Shukla (Judicial Member) and Pradip Kumar Kedia (Accountant Member) allowed an

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Delhi High Court: The Division Bench of Manmohan and Navin Chawla, JJ., while focusing on the principles of natural justice and right

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal
Case BriefsTribunals/Commissions/Regulatory Bodies

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT): Coram of Anil Chaturvedi (Accountant Member) and Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member) allowed the appeal filed by the

Case BriefsTribunals/Commissions/Regulatory Bodies

Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): P. Dinesha (Judicial Member) allowed an appeal which was filed with the point of

CBDT
Legislation UpdatesRules & Regulations

The Central Board of Direct Taxes has notified the Income-tax (30th Amendment) Rules, 2021 vide notification dated 24th September, 2021. The amendment

Case BriefsTribunals/Commissions/Regulatory Bodies

Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): The Coram of Dilip Gupta (President) and C.J. Mathew (Technical Member) allowed an appeal

Case BriefsSupreme Court

“… in taxation regime, there is no room for presumption and nothing can be taken to be implied.”

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal
Case BriefsTribunals/Commissions/Regulatory Bodies

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT): A two-Member Bench of Pramod Kumar, Vice President and Amarjit Singh, Judicial Member, referred a seminal question