HC

HC: Penalty imposed u/s 158BFA(2), ‘discretionary’ and not ‘mandatory’ in nature

Andhra Pradesh  and Telangana HC holds that penalty u/s 158BFA(2)  was directory and not mandatory in nature and holds that “It is trite position of law that any discretion vested

Mar 09,2018

HC: Allows Sec. 263 proceedings for DLF group’s Sec. 80IAB SEZ-deduction on building sale to co-developer

Delhi HC set-asides ITAT order, upholds CIT’s revisionary proceedings u/s. 263 directing AO to conduct detailed inquiry regarding allowability of Sec. 80IAB deduction to DLF Commercial Developers Ltd. (‘assessee’) on

Mar 05,2018

HC: Absent 'corruption' allegations, DG-Investigations responses excluded from RTI; Assessment not investigation u/s 8

Delhi HC sets-aside Central Information Commission’s (‘CIC’) order directing CBDT to supply the information pertaining to the net wealth of certain MLAs and MPs under the Right to Information Act,

Mar 05,2018

HC: Quashes re-assessment; AO cannot re-visit claim allowed by appellate authority

Gujarat HC quashes re-assessment for AY 2010-2011 initiated beyond 4 years period on assessee-company, absent failure to disclose full and true material facts; After CIT(A)’s order allowing assessee’s claim for

Mar 02,2018

HC: Upholds 'transfer' in the year of execution of development agreement, and not POA

Bombay HC approves ITAT order, holds that transfer of property took  place u/s. 2(47)(v) in subject AY 2002-03 when the development agreement between assessee-individuals (property owners) and developer was executed;

Mar 02,2018

HC: Contextually interprets ‘commercial activity’, grants Sec. 10(46) exemption to township development authority

Delhi HC allows Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority’s (‘assessee’) writ, holds assessee is not engaged in ‘commercial activity’, directs CBDT to issue necessary notification granting exemption u/s. 10(46); Revenue had

Mar 01,2018

HC: Reverses ITAT; Advance not genuine commercial transaction, cannot escape deemed dividend taxation

Delhi HC reverses ITAT’s order, holds that advance received by the assessee from Ginza (in which it had more than 10% shareholding) during AY 1995-96 cannot be termed as ‘advance

Mar 01,2018

HC: Reverses ITAT; Separate non-compete fees received by Pharma company’s MD, a capital receipt

Andhra Pradesh and Telangana HC reverses ITAT order, holds that non-compete fees received by assessee-individual (Chairman & MD of Natco Pharma Ltd.) from Ranbaxy (‘RLL’) and Sun Pharmaceuticals (‘SPIL’) during AYs

Mar 01,2018

HC: Audit report, though prepared for non-tax purpose, a tangible material to reopen assessment

Bombay HC dismisses assessee-company’s (an electronic spot exchange for commodities) writ, upholds re-assessment for AY 2010-11 initiated beyond 4 years period on the basis of a special audit report; Rejects assessee’s stand that in

Feb 28,2018

HC: Quashes penalty as time-barred; Revenue's withdrawn ITAT -appeal cannot influence limitation period

Delhi HC reverses ITAT order, quashes penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) for AY 1989-90 as barred by limitation u/s 275 in view of Revenue’s failure to pass penalty order within 6 months from

Feb 27,2018

Pages

Top