← All Phrases

“Section 4(2)(b)”

Section References (mined)Section 4Section 4(2)(b)5 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 4(2)(b) is B Kishore Kumar v. DCIT (229 Taxmann 614), cited in 100 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 4(2)(b)

B Kishore Kumar v. DCIT
229 Taxmann 614 · 2015 · High Court
100
citing judgments

A retracted statement made during a search under section 132(4) carries no weight and is rejected, especially when the genuineness of purchases is disproved.

CIT v. Varas International
284 ITR 80 · Supreme Court
79
citing judgments

An appellate authority can admit additional legal grounds for the first time, even if not raised earlier, provided these grounds are purely legal, go to the root of the matter, and the relevant facts for their adjudication are already on record.

AA520 Veerappampalayam Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
138 Taxmann.com 571 · 2022 · High Court
78
citing judgments

The Centralized Processing Centre (CPC) can deny deductions claimed under Chapter VI-A, such as Section 80P, during the processing of a return under Section 143(1) if conditions for claiming such deductions, including filing the return by the due date as per Section 80AC, are not met.

CIT v. Mahalaxmi Glass Works (P) Ltd.
318 ITR 116 · 2009 · High Court
64
citing judgments

When the valuation of closing stock is adjusted to include CENVAT or Modvat credit under Section 145A, a corresponding adjustment must also be made to the opening stock.

CIT v. Mahavir Alluminium Ltd.
297 ITR 77 · 2008 · High Court
58
citing judgments

When the Assessing Officer revalues the closing stock, the opening stock must also be revalued on the same basis to ensure consistency in the method of accounting and proper computation of business income.

IDS Software Solutions P. Ltd. v. ITO
122 TTJ 410 · 2009 · ITAT
50
citing judgments

An Indian company that exercises control and supervision over a seconded employee and bears the salary cost is an economic employer. Such a company is not liable to withhold tax on the reimbursement of salary to the overseas company, thereby avoiding disallowance under Section 40(a)(i).

L.RS. AND ORS. (2016)10 SCC 315 and PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE & ORS. v. SOFTBRANDS INDIA P. LTD.
406 ITR 513 · 2018 · High Court
48
citing judgments

For comparability analysis in transfer pricing, giant companies with significantly higher turnover and brand value cannot be compared with small-sized companies, and such companies should be excluded from the comparable set.

Director of Income Tax v. Sheraton International Inc.
178 Taxmann 84 · 2009 · High Court
48
citing judgments

Receipts do not constitute 'fees for technical services' under Section 9(1)(vii) of the Income Tax Act and Article 12(4)(b) of a Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA), specifically when interpreting the 'make available' clause.

Judgments citing Section 4(2)(b)