You are not Logged in

Direct Taxes - Special Leave Petitions

Search :
  

SLP DETAILS

 
2018 TaxPub(DT) 7000 (SC) - Pr. CIT v. Lakshminarayana Mining Company
S.L.P. (C) No. 27670 of 2018 Dated : 24 September, 2018
SECTION - Section 261 Section 10B
Appeal (Supreme Court) - Special leave petition Deduction under section 10B 100 per cent export-oriented undertaking--Location of unit outside customs bonded area, whether disqualification
Department preferred SLP to appeal against the judgment of Karnataka High Court in CIT & Anr. v. Lakshminarayana Mining Co. ITA No. 715/2017 c/w ITA Nos. 714, 716/2017, dated 6-4-2018 : (2018) 404 ITR 522 (Karn), whereby the High Court following CIT v. Caritor (India) (P) Ltd. (2014) 369 ITR 463 (Karn) held that mere location of the |SESA Plant| outside the EOU and customs bonded area was not a disqualification to claim deduction under section 10B.Held: The Supreme Court dismissed the SLP. - Where the department preferred SLP to appeal against the judgment of Karnataka High Court in CIT & Anr. v. Lakshminarayana Mining Co. ITA No. 715/2017 c/w ITA Nos. 714, 716/2017, dated 6-4-20018: (2018) 404 ITR 522 (Karn), whereby the High court following CIT v. Caritor (India) (P) Ltd. (2014) 369 ITR 463 (Karn) held that mere location of the |SESA Plant| outside the EOU and customs bonded area was not a disqualification to claim deduction under section 10B, the Supreme Court dismissed the SLP.
DECISION - SLP dismissed.
2018 TaxPub(DT) 6594 (SC) : (2018) 407 ITR (St.) 23 (SC) - Pr. CIT v. Moonstar Securities Trading & Finance Co. (P) Ltd.
S.L.P. (C) No. 23734 of 2018 Dated : 20 August, 2018
SECTION - Section 261 Section 14A Section 115JB
Appeal (Supreme Court) - Special leave petition Disallowance under section 14A Applicability of rule 8D--Condition precedent
Department preferred SLP to appeal against the judgment of Delhi High Court in Pr. CIT v. Moonstar Securities Trading & Finance Co. Ltd. ITA No. 81 of 2018, dated 24-1-2018, whereby the High Court following (2015) 376 ITR 338 (Del) held that the Tribunal was right in holding in favour of assessee in a case where the AO having merely proceeded to reject the expenditure declared by assessee as incurred in relation to tax free income, and straightaway applied rule 6D without adducing any reasons. Held: The Supreme Court observing that it would be open to petitioner to move the High Court on the issue of section 115JB, which was raised but was not decided by High Court, disposed of the SLP. - Where Department preferred SLP to appeal against the judgment of Delhi High Court in Pr. CIT v. Moonstar Securities Trading & Finance Co. Ltd. ITA No. 81 of 2018, dated 24-1-2018, whereby the High Court following (2015) 376 ITR 338 (Del) held that the Tribunal was right in holding in favour of assessee in a case where the AO having merely proceeded to reject the expenditure declared by assessee as incurred in relation to tax free income, and straightaway applied rule 6D without adducing any reasons, the Supreme Court observing that it would be open to petitioner to move the High Court on the issue of section 115JB, which was raised but was not decided by High Court, disposed of the SLP.
DECISION - SLP disposed of with certain directions.
2018 TaxPub(DT) 5567 (SC) - CIT v. Hotel Gaudavan (P) Ltd.
Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No(s). 24980/2018 Dated : 13 August, 2018
SECTION - Section 261 Section 32 Sections 41(1) & 68
Appeal (Supreme Court) - Special leave petition Disallowance of depreciation claimed on hotel building Additions towards cessation of liability under section 41(1) and unexplained share capital
Department preferred SLP to appeal against the judgment of Rajasthan High Court in CIT v. Hotel Gaudavan (P) Ltd. [ITA Nos. 157, 167 & 321/2011, dt. 21-8-2017], whereby the High Court dismissed the department|s appeal holding that the Tribunal was justified in deleting the addition made by AO on account of cessation of liability under section 41(1), as also by way of disallowance of depreciation claimed on hotel building.Held: The Supreme Court condoned delay and dismissed the SLP. - Where the department preferred SLP to appeal against the judgment of Rajasthan High Court in [CIT v. Hotel Gaudavan (P) Ltd. [ITA Nos. 157, 167 & 321/2011, dt. 21-8-2017], whereby the High Court dismissed the department|s appeal holding that the Tribunal was justified in deleting the addition made by AO on account of cessation of liability under section 41(1), as also by way of disallowance of depreciation claimed on hotel building, the Supreme Court condoned delay and dismissed the SLP.
DECISION - SLP dismissed.
2018 TaxPub(DT) 7011 (SC) - CIT v. Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries Ltd.
C.A. No. 9105 of 2017 Dated : 4 July, 2017
SECTION - Section 261 Section 147
Appeal (Supreme Court) - Special leave petition Reassessment under section 147 Jurisdiction of AO to tax incomes not included in reasons
Department preferred SLP to appeal against the judgment of Delhi High Court in Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. CIT ITA No. 148, dated 6-3-2008 : (2011) 336 ITR 136 (Del), whereby the High Court held that the Tribunal was right in holding that the AO had no jurisdiction to reassess issues, other than the issues in respect of which proceedings were initiated but he was not so justified when the reasons for the initiation of those proceedings ceased to survive.Held: The Supreme Court granted special leave to department to appeal against the High court|s ruling. - Where the department preferred SLP to appeal against the judgment of Delhi High Court in Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. CIT ITA No. 148, dated 6-3-2008 : (2011) 336 ITR 136 (Del), whereby the High Court held that the Tribunal was right in holding that the AO had no jurisdiction to reassess issues, other than the issues in respect of which proceedings were initiated, but he was not so justified when the reasons for the initiation of those proceedings ceased to survive, the Supreme Court granted special leave to department to appeal thereagainst.
DECISION - Leave granted.
2018 TaxPub(DT) 4540 (SC) - CIT v. Sakata Inx (India) Ltd.
Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No(s). 18868/2018 Dated : 2 July, 2018
SECTION - section 261 Section 92C
Appeal (Supreme Court) - Special leave petition Transfer pricing Computation of ALP--Payment of royalty
Department filed SLP to appeal agianst the judgment of Rajasthan High Court in CIT v. Sakata Inx (India) Ltd. [ITA No. 71/2015 and ITA No. 128/2016, dt. 26-7-2017], whereby the High court dismissed the department|s appeal holding that companies functionally dissimilar with that of assessee need to be deselected.Held: The Supreme Court condoned delay and dismissed the SLP. - Where the department filed SLP to appeal against the judgment of Rajasthan High Court in CIT v. Sakata Inx (India) Ltd. [ITA No. 71/2015 and ITA No. 128/2016, dt. 26-7-2017], whereby the High Court dismissed the department|s appeal holding that companies functionally dissimilar with that of assessee need to be deselected, the Supreme Court condoned delay and dismissed the SLP.
DECISION - SLP dismissed.
2018 TaxPub(DT) 5032 (SC) - Bhansali Trading Company v. Pr. CIT
Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No(s). 12416/2018 Dated : 20 April, 2018
SECTION - Section 261 Section 10B
Appeal (Supreme Court) - Special leave petition Deduction under section 10B 100 per cent export-oriented undertaking--100 per cent export-oriented undertaking--Manufacturing activity started from 12-3-2001.
Assessee preferred SLP to appeal against the judgment of Rajasthan High Court in Pr. CIT v. Bhhansali Trading Co. Jaipur ITA No. 32/2017, dt. 123-12-2017, whereby the High Court held that on plain reading of section 10B(1), two things which emerge are that the benefit will start from the date of manufacturing and admittedly in this case, manufacturing activity started from 12-3-2001, in that view of the matter, the benefit will follow for the year assessment 2001-02 and not for the year 2010-11.Held: The Supreme Court condoned delay and dismissed the SLP. - Where the assessee preferred SLP to appeal against the judgment of Rajasthan High Court in Pr. CIT v. Bhhansali Trading Co. Jaipur ITA No. 32/2017, dt. 123-12-2017, whereby the High Court held that on plain reading of section 10B(1), two things which emerge are that the benefit will start from the date of manufacturing and admittedly in this case, manufacturing activity started from 12-3-2001, in that view of the matter, the benefit will follow for the year assessment 2001-02 and not for the year 2010-11, the Supreme Court condoned delay and dismissed the SLP.
DECISION - SLP dismissed.
2018 TaxPub(DT) 6831 (SC) : (2018) 259 Taxman 220 (SC) - Sundaram Finance Ltd. v. Dy. CIT
Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No(s). 34548/2018, Diary No. 34544/2018 Dated : 26 October, 2018
SECTION - Section 261 Section 271(1)(c)
Appeal (Supreme Court) - Special leave petition Penalty under section 271(1)(c) Concealment and furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income--Leviability
Assessee preferred SLP to appeal against the judgment of Madras High Court in Sundaram Finance Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [T.C. (Appeal) Nos. 876 and 877 of 2008, dt. 23-4-2010] 2018 TaxPub(DT) 2565 (Mad-HC), whereby the High Court held that once facts were tested on anvil of legal principles, it was not necessary that there should be wilful concealment for attracting the civil liability of penalty under section 271(1)(c) and even assming that there was defect in notice, it had caused no prejudice to assessee, as assessee understood what was the purport of notice.Held: The Supreme Court condoned delay and dismissed the SLP. - Where the assessee preferred SLP to appeal against the judgment of Madras High Court in Sundaram Finance Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [T.C. (Appeal) Nos. 876 and 877 of 2008, dt. 23-4-2010] : 2018 TaxPub(DT) 2565 (Mad-HC), whereby the High Court held that once facts were tested on anvil of legal principles, it was not necessary that there should be wilful concealment for attracting the civil liability of penalty under section 271(1)(c) and even assming that there was defect in notice, it had caused no prejudice to assessee, as assessee understood what was the purport of notice, the Supreme Court condoned delay and dismissed the SLP.
DECISION - SLP dismissed.
2018 TaxPub(DT) 5140 (SC) : (2018) 406 ITR (St.) 10 (SC) - CIT v. Ram Niwas Yadav
C. A. No. 6088 of 2018 Dated : 2 July, 2018
SECTION - Section 261 Section 194C
Appeal (Supreme Court) - Special leave petition Deduction of tax at source under section 194C Payments to sub-contractors
Department preferred SLP to appeal against the judgment of Rajasthan High Court in ITA No. 74 of 2015, dated 10-11-2017, whereby the High Court held that the Tribunal was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 80,71,910 made on account of non-deduction of tax at source under section 194C from payments made to sub-contractors.Held: The Supreme Court granted special leave to department to appeal against the High Court|s ruling. - Where the department preferred SLP to appeal against the judgment of Rajasthan High Court in ITA No. 74 of 2015, dated 10-11-2017, whereby the High Court held that the Tribunal was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 80,71,910 made on account of non-deduction of tax at source under section 194C from payments made to sub-contractors, the Supreme Court granted special leave to department to appeal thereagainst.
DECISION - Leave granted.
2018 TaxPub(DT) 5134 (SC) : (2018) 406 ITR (St.) 4 (SC) - Pr. CIT v. Jadau Jewellers & Manufactures (P) Ltd.
C.A. No. 6174 of 2018 Dated : 6 July, 2018
SECTION - Section 261 Section 37(1) Section 40A(3)
Appeal (Supreme Court) - Special leave petition Business expenditure Disallowance of trading expenditure as well as payments in cash
Department preferred SLP to appeal against the judgment of Rajasthan High Court in ITA No. 196 of 2017, dated 4-9-2017, whereby the High Court held that Tribunal was right in restricting the trading addition to Rs. 9,52,599 out of the total trading addition of Rs. 91,37,068 and, following (2008) 296 ITR 324 (Raj) in confirming the deletion of the disallowance of Rs. 2,71,50,538 made under section 40A(3).Held: The Supreme Court granted special leave to department to appeal against the High Court|s ruling. - Where the department preferred SLP to appeal against the judgment of Rajasthan High Court in ITA No. 196 of 2017, dated 4-9-2017, whereby the High Court held that Tribunal was right in restricting the trading addition to Rs. 9,52,599 out of the total trading addition of Rs. 91,37,068 and, following (2008) 296 ITR 324 (Raj), in confirming the deletion of the disallowance of Rs. 2,71,50,538 made under section 40A(3), the Supreme Court granted special leave to department to appeal thereagainst.
DECISION - Leave granted.
2018 TaxPub(DT) 7003 (SC) : (2018) 408 ITR(St.) 26 (SC) - Dy. CIT v. Central U.P. Gas Ltd.
C.A. No. 9424 of 2018 Dated : 4 September, 2018
SECTION - Section 261 Section 80HHC Section 80-IA
Appeal (Supreme Court) - Special leave petition Exemption under sections 80HHC and 80-IA Compression of natural gas--New use and distinct commercial identity
Where the department preferred SLP to appeal against the judgment of Allahabad High Court in Central UP Gas Ltd. v. Dy. CIT ITA No. 224 of 2014, dated 8-12-2016, whereby the High Court held that the entire process of compression by which natural gas was compressed and after being compressed, acquired a new and changed name of compressed natural gas and a new use and distinct commercial identity, hence, it would amount to manufacture or production.Held: The Supreme Court granted special leave to department to appeal against the High Court|s rulling. - Where the department preferred SLP to appeal against the judgment of Allahabad High Court in Central UP Gas Ltd. v. Dy. CIT ITA No. 224 of 2014, dated 8-12-2016, whereby the High Court held that the entire process of compression by which natural gas was compressed and after being compressed, acquired a new and changed name of compressed natural gas and a new use and distinct commercial identity, hence, it would amount to manufacture or production, the Supreme Court granted special leave to department to appeal thereagainst.
DECISION - Leave granted.
12345678910...