Summary of Judgment Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-I, Udupi vs. Dr. K. Satish Shett, February 22, 2008 (HC Kar) Question “Whether the Tribunal was correct in applying the principle laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. v. State of Orissa in 83 ITR 26 to the facts of
Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi-XI, New Delhi Vs Standing Conference of Public Enterprises (SCOPE), September 25, 2009 (HC Delhi) QUESTIONS (i) Whether the assessee society is a mutual concern so as to claim exemption on principle of mutuality? (ii) Whether the ITAT was correct in law in holding that only rental income received by the
Commissioner of Income-tax VS Bharat Aluminium Co. Ltd, October 15, 2009 (HC Delhi) QUESTIONS “(1) Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in allowing the amount of Rs. 3.76 crores (wrongly written by ITAT as 3.76 lakhs) being capital expenditure not represented by any assets to the assessee? (2) Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was
Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd. VS Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 1(1), Trichur, August3, 2009 (HC Kerala) An assessment which could be modified by a higher authority cannot be said to have become final or concluded until expiry of the statutory time provided for such orders because it is always subject to revision by higher authority within
Additional Commissioner of Income-tax Vs HCL Technologies Ltd, September 7, 2009 (Supreme Court) When the High Court has remitted the matter to the TPO from whose order an appeal is pending before the CIT(A), it would be in the interest of both sides to resort to Alternate Dispute Resolution Mechanism suggested in the Budget of
