ITAT Cannot Decide On Grounds Not Addressed By Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals): Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court recently said aside an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, deciding grounds that did not arise from the impugned order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). A division bench of Acting Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela observed, “The Assessee's challenge to the addition of ₹4,30,00,000/- under Section 68 of...

Baggage Rules Should Be Reviewed To Prevent Harassment Of Genuine Air Travellers Carrying Gold Jewellery To Attend Weddings: Delhi HC

The Delhi High Court has urged the Central government as well as the Customs department to review the Baggage Rules, 2016 which regulate the amount of gold or gold jewellery that can be carried by a person travelling to India by air. A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Dharmesh Sharma observed, “While, there is no doubt that any illegal smuggling of gold deserves to...

Samsung India Electronics Not A 'Permanent Establishment' Of Samsung Korea, Cannot Be Taxed In India: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd (SIEL), a wholly owned subsidiary of South Korea-based Samsung Electronics Co. is not its 'Permanent Establishment' (PE) in India, hence not exigible to tax here.A division bench of Justices Yashwant Varma and Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar agreed with ITAT's findings that the secondment of employees by Samsung Korea was...

Delhi High Court Reserves Verdict On Plea Seeking Special Sitting Of Assembly To Table CAG Reports

The Delhi High Court on Thursday reserved verdict on a petition seeking a special sitting of the Legislative Assembly to table various reports of the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG).Justice Sachin Datta reserved judgment in the plea filed by Leader of Opposition in the Delhi Legislative Assembly Vijender Gupta and six BJP MLAs Mohan Singh Bisht, Om Prakash Sharma, Ajay Kumar Mahawar,...

Arbitrator's Order Determining Substantive Rights Of Parties Constitutes “Award”, Amenable To Challenge U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi HC

The Delhi High Court division bench of Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Shalinder Kaur has held that orders passed by the Arbitrator during the pendency of Arbitral proceedings, which finally determines any substantive rights of the parties, constitutes an interim Arbitral Award, and can be challenged under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,...

S.149 IT Act | Additions Made During Reassessment Don't Validate Proceedings Initiated For Income Escapement Below ₹50 Lakh Threshold: Delhi HC

The Delhi High Court has held that the benchmark of minimum Rs. 50 lakh income escapement prescribed under Section 149 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 must be met at the very initiation of reassessment proceedings. A division bench of Justices Yashwant Varma and Dharmesh Sharma observed, “Additions ultimately made in the course of reassessment would not validate the initiation...

Tariff, License Fee Received By Electricity Regulatory Commissions Not Exigible To Tax: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that amounts received by the Electricity Regulatory Commissions under the heads of filing fee, tariff fee, license fee, annual registration fee and miscellaneous fee are not exigible to tax. A division bench of Justices Yashwant Varma and Dharmesh Sharma thus allowed the petitions filed by the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission as well as...

Absence Of Formal Communication U/S 148A Of Income Tax Act Not Fatal When Opportunity To Question Reassessment Had Been Provided: Delhi HC

The Delhi High Court observed that absence of a formal notice under Section 148A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was not fatal to reassessment proceedings initiated in the twilight zone when the inquiry provisions were introduced by the Finance Act, 2021. A division bench of Justices Yashwant Varma and Dharmesh Sharma noted that the Department had provided an opportunity...

Arbitral Award Cannot Be Challenged In Writ Petition, Party Must Use Remedy U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Sachin Datta has held that it cannot entertain a writ petition challenging an arbitral award, and the petitioner should challenge the award by taking recourse to appropriate remedies under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act. Brief Facts: The present petition challenged an arbitral award passed pursuant to reference to arbitration under Section...

'APAR Can't Be Interfered With If It Complies With Guidelines And Is Not Actuated By Malice', Delhi High Court

A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justices Navin Chawla and Shalinder Kaur dismissed a Writ Petition seeking to upgrade the Petitioner's Annual Performance Appraisal Report (APAR) based on being graded as 'very good' and 'outstanding' in the previous years. The Court further held that the APAR could not be interfered with as the Reporting Officer had written the...

Expert Tribunal's Award Did Not Suffer From Patent Illegality, Cannot Be Set Aside U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Yashwant Varma and Justice Dharmesh Sharma has held that the scope of interference by the Court with the arbitral award under Section 34 is very limited, and the Court is not supposed to travel beyond the aforesaid scope to determine whether the award is good or bad.In the present case, the court held that the expert tribunals award did not suffer from...

Revocation Petition Can Be Filed Or Sustained After Expiry Of Term Of Patent: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has ruled that a revocation petition can be filed or sustained after the expiry of the term of the patent. While dealing with a patent infringement suit, Justice Amit Bansal observed that just because the term of the patent has expired, it would not mean that the suit has become infructuous, as the cause of action still survives. “Applying the same rationale, it cannot...