Blog Categories
Subscribe to Newsletter
Join our subscribers list to get the latest Tax Updates and Opportunities.
Remote Technical Support Without “Make Available” Does Not Constitute Fees for Technical Services; No TDS Obligation Under India–USA DTAA – PCIT-2 vs. Ciena Communications India Pvt. Ltd. (Delhi High Court)
Facts of the CaseThe respondent-assessee, Ciena Communications India Pvt. Ltd.,
made payments to its associated enterprise, Ciena Communications Inc., USA,
during Assessment Years 2012–13, 2013–14 and 2014–15 for...
Additions Under Section 153C Unsustainable Without Incriminating Material Belonging to Assessee; Survey Material Cannot Expand Jurisdiction – PCIT (Central)-3 vs. TDI Infrastructure Ltd. (Delhi High Court)
Facts of the CaseSearch and seizure operations under Section 132 were conducted
on 05.01.2009 in the cases of the Taneja–Puri Group. During the same period,
survey proceedings under Section 133A were also carried out...
Penalty Under Section 271(1)(c) Invalid Where Notice Fails to Specify Charge; Vague and Omnibus Notices Vitiate Proceedings – PCIT–04 vs. Gragerious Projects Pvt. Ltd. (Delhi High Court)
Facts of the CaseThe assessee, M/s Gragerious Projects Pvt. Ltd., filed its
return of income for Assessment Year 2015–16 declaring a substantial loss.
During scrutiny assessment under Section 143(3), the Assessing Of...
Review Petition Pending on Cut-Off Date Qualifies as “Pending Proceedings” Under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme; Rejection Set Aside – NRA Iron and Steel Pvt. Ltd. vs. Income Tax Department (Delhi High Court)
Facts of the CaseThe petitioner, NRA Iron and Steel Pvt. Ltd., challenged the
order dated 28.01.2021 whereby its revised declaration filed under the Direct
Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 for Assessment Year 2009–10 w...
Reopening Upheld Where Investigation Wing Material Shows Accommodation Entries Despite GST Compliance; Limited Scope of Section 148A Review – Majestic Handicraft Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT (Delhi High Court)
Facts of the CaseThe petitioner, Majestic Handicraft Private Limited, filed its
return of income for Assessment Year 2018–19 on 17.10.2018, which was processed
under Section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The pe...
ITAT Cannot Remand Transfer Pricing Issues Without Adjudicating Grounds Raised; Separate ALP Adjustment for Purchase of Finished Goods Requires Independent Consideration – Luxottica India Eyewear Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT (Delhi High Court)
Facts of the CaseThe assessee, Luxottica India Eyewear Pvt. Ltd., is an Indian
subsidiary of Luxottica Holland B.V. and is engaged in the business of trading
sunglasses. For Assessment Year 2010–11, the assessee file...
Assessment Proceedings Time-Barred Where No Order Passed After ITAT Remand Within Section 153 Limitation; Refund Directed – Huawei Telecommunications India Co. Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT (Delhi High Court)
Facts of the CaseThe petitioner, Huawei Telecommunications India Company
Private Limited, filed its return of income for Assessment Year 2012–13
declaring a loss. The return was selected for scrutiny and assessment w...
Investment in Property With Brick Kiln Not Eligible for Section 54F Exemption; “Makaan” in Sale Deed Not Sufficient to Prove Residential House – Himanshu Garg vs. ACIT (Delhi High Court)
Facts of the CaseThe assessee, Himanshu Garg, sold certain lands during
Assessment Year 2014–15 for a consideration of ₹3,23,88,500/- and declared
long-term capital gains of ₹1,84,23,729/-. He claimed exemption u...
Transfer Pricing Reference Without International Transaction Is Without Jurisdiction; TPO Cannot Re-Benchmark Past Asset Acquisition for Depreciation Year – Fab India Overseas Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT (Delhi High Court)
Facts of the CaseThe petitioner, Fab India Overseas Private Limited, challenged
the order dated 28.01.2021 passed by the Transfer Pricing Officer for
Assessment Year 2011–12. The petitioner had acquired the trademark...
Reopening Beyond Four Years Invalid Absent Allegation of Failure to Disclose Material Facts; Change of Opinion Not Permissible – Discovery Communications India vs. Addl. CIT (Delhi High Court)
Facts of the CaseThe petitioner, Discovery Communications India, was engaged in
the business of distribution, advertisement sales, marketing and production of
educational and entertainment programmes for various Discov...