INCOME TAX ACT – Delhi High Court Judgements

Delhi High Court Directs AO To Provide Information To Vodafone Mauritius To Drive Out The Validity Of TRC

admin_lawsdelhi Jun 26, 2023 0 Comments

AO has attributed an intent to the assessee, which is that it would indulge in tax evasion, inter alia, by treaty shopping, without any material or information of such kind…

DIRECT TAXATION INCOME TAX ACT

DB – Assessment Order Cannot Be Directed Against Only One Of The Legal Heirs Of Deceased Assessee

admin_lawsdelhi Jun 26, 2023 0 Comments

Delhi HC has set aside an assessment order of Rs. 10 crores passed by the Income Tax Department, solely on the ground that it was passed against only one of…

DIRECT TAXATION INCOME TAX ACT

DB – Delhi HC has set aside the department’s action in adjusting a sum of Rs. 6,27,20,736 under Section 245 of the Income Tax Act and remanded the matter to the concerned authority to decide afresh, within a period of four weeks.

admin_lawsdelhi Jun 14, 2023 0 Comments

Delhi HC has set aside the department’s action in adjusting a sum of Rs. 6,27,20,736 under Section 245 of the Income Tax Act and remanded the matter to the concerned…

DIRECT TAXATION INCOME TAX ACT

e-assessment nor the faceless assessment scheme in any manner modifies the power to transfer cases from one Assessing Officer under a Principal Commissioner of Income Tax to another Assessing Officer under another Principal Commissioner of Income Tax who are holding non-concurrent charges.

admin_lawsdelhi May 28, 2023 0 Comments

E-assessment and the Faceless Assessment Scheme only authorize the transfer back of the case to the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer holding original jurisdiction, which he never loses as only the function…

Delhi High Court Directs AO To Provide Information To Vodafone Mauritius To Drive Out The Validity Of TRC

DB – Assessment Order Cannot Be Directed Against Only One Of The Legal Heirs Of Deceased Assessee

DB – Delhi HC has set aside the department’s action in adjusting a sum of Rs. 6,27,20,736 under Section 245 of the Income Tax Act and remanded the matter to the concerned authority to decide afresh, within a period of four weeks.

e-assessment nor the faceless assessment scheme in any manner modifies the power to transfer cases from one Assessing Officer under a Principal Commissioner of Income Tax to another Assessing Officer under another Principal Commissioner of Income Tax who are holding non-concurrent charges.

You Missed

Evidence By Way Of Affidavit Not Mandatory When Documentary Evidence Sufficient For Determining Well-Known Status Of Trademark

DB – services rendered by advocates are professional activities, and, therefore, they cannot be levied with taxes under the “commercial establishment” category

DB – Defamation — Nowhere in the pleadings or in the evidence did the appellant or its witnesses state that the amounts were not due — Respondent’s assertion of there being outstanding amounts which had not been paid by the appellant Company cannot be termed to be false or per se defamatory.