Direct Tax Weekly Round-Up: December 29, 2025 - January 04, 2026

HIGH COURTSAndhra Pradesh HCIncome Tax | Delay in Filing Form 10-B Due To COVID Cannot Deny S.11 Exemption: Andhra Pradesh High CourtCase Title: M/s Amnos Evangelical v. The Centralized Processing Centre, BengaluruCase Number: WRIT PETITION NO: 8798 OF 2025The Andhra Pradesh High Court held that the exemption under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act cannot be denied merely on account of delay in filing the Form 10-B Audit Report when such delay was caused by the COVID-19 Pandemic.Justices Battu Devanand and A. Hari Haranadha Sarma observed that the assessee is a religious and charitable society and has to comply with the instructions issued by the Income Tax Department through their letter. Due to the Covid-19 Pandemic, the assessee could not attend the letter issued by the Department and the documents sought by the Department were not furnished within the stipulated time.Calcutta HCIncome Tax | Reopening Not Hit By Change Of Opinion If Earlier Proceedings Dropped Due To Lack Of Evidence: Calcutta High CourtCase Title: Mark Steels Limited v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Kolkata & Ors.Case Number: WPO 584 of 2025The Calcutta High Court held that the mere reopening of an assessment under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act cannot be treated as a change of opinion if the earlier proceedings were dropped due to lack of evidence.Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury stated that on the basis of a change of opinion of the assessing officer, a notice under Section 148 of the said Act cannot be issued. For a case of change of opinion to be established an assessing officer must arrive at an opinion that there has been no escapement of income on the ground noted therein.Delhi HCIncome Tax Act | Delhi High Court Sets Aside Reassessment Against MakeMyTrip Over ₹50 Crore Receipt, Cites Vague S.148A NoticesCase title: Makemytrip India Private Limited v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 16 1 Delhi & AnrCase no.: W.P.(C) 19288/2025The Delhi High Court has set aside reassessment proceedings initiated against MakeMyTrip India Pvt. Ltd., holding that the notices issued under Section 148A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 were unreasoned.A Division Bench of Justices V. Kameswar Rao and Vinod Kumar allowed the writ petition filed by the company, which had challenged the reassessment action relating to an alleged unexplained receipt of over ₹50 crore, purportedly arising from information obtained during a search conducted in the case of a third party.India-US DTAA | Outsourcing Customer Care Services To Indian Subsidiary Doesn't Create PE: Delhi High CourtCase title: Commissioner Of Income Tax (International Tax-1), New Delhi v. Exl Service.Com Inc (Presently Known As Exl Service Com Llc)Case no.: ITA 748/2025The Delhi High Court has held that outsourcing customer care and back-office services to an Indian subsidiary does not, by itself, result in the creation of a Permanent Establishment (PE) in India under the India–US Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA).A Division Bench of Justices V. Kameswar Rao and Vinod Kumar thus dismissed a batch of appeals filed by the Income Tax Department against EXL Service.com Inc., upholding the findings of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) that the US-based entity did not have a fixed place PE, service PE, or agency PE in India.20% Pre-Deposit Not Mandatory For Stay Of Demand, AO Must Exercise Discretion U/S 220(6) Income Tax Act: Delhi High CourtCase title: Clearmedi Healthcare Private Limited v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 4(2), Delhi & OrsCase no.: W.P.(C) 19495/2025The Delhi High Court has reiterated that deposit of 20% of the disputed tax demand is not mandatory for grant of stay, and that the Assessing Officer (AO) must independently exercise discretion under Section 220(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.A division bench of Justices V. Kameswar Rao and Vinod Kumar relied on National Association of Software and Services Companies (NASSCOM) v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption)Circle 2 (1), Delhi And Ors (2024) where it was held that 20% pre-deposit demand is not a precondition for consideration of a stay application during the pendency of the first appeal.Ignorance Of Indian Tax Law Not 'Genuine Hardship' To Condone Delay In Filing ITR: Delhi High Court Rejects Canadian Citizen's PleaCase title: Manjit Singh Dhaliwal v. Commissioner Of Income Tax International Taxation 01 New DelhiCase no.: W.P.(C) 19589/2025The Delhi High Court has held that ignorance of Indian tax laws doesn't constitute “genuine hardship” to condone delay in filing an Income Tax Return (ITR) under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.A division bench of Justices V. Kameswar Rao and Vinod Kumar thus rejected the plea of a Canadian citizen seeking such relief on ground of being unaware of Indian tax requirements and facing difficulties due to COVID-19 pandemic.Transfer Pricing | Comparables With Non-Export Operations Can't Be Benchmarked Against Export-Only Assessee:...

Direct Tax Weekly Round-Up: December 29, 2025 - January 04, 2026

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags