-
Section 234B, 234C - Assessee is liable to pay advance tax as per the amended provisions by Finance Act, 2002 of Section 115JB of the Act for the relevant period.
CIT vs M/S KIRLOSKAR SYSTEMS LTD
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 2352 (HC-KARNATAKA) · Income Tax Section 234B, 234C
-
Section 40A(3) - Single transaction - Payment in cash in excess of Rs.20,000/- for purchase the scrap from the Railways. Hon`ble High court upheld ITAT ruling reported in (2012) 6 TaxCorp (A.T.) 28131 (BANGALORE). Assessee is a scrap dealer purchasing scrap from the Railways. Admittedly Railways is a concern of the Union of India. If any cash is paid towards purchase of the scrap the same cannot be disputed by the Revenue since such payment has to be considered as a legal tender. If the Revenue is of the opinion that no such payment has been made to the Railways, we could have considered their grievance.
CIT vs Sri Devendrappa M. Kalal
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 2336 (HC-KARNATAKA) · Income Tax Section 40A(3)
-
Bottling LPG gas to Gas Cylinders amounts to 'manufacture' for the purpose of section 80IB
PUTTUR PETRO PRODUCTS PVT LTD vs ACIT
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 2335 (HC-KARNATAKA) · Income Tax Section 80IB
-
Merely because the assessee withdrew the deduction, conceded to the demand of the department and paid tax and interest, as there is no malafide intention, the assessee cannot be imposed penalty.
CIT vs Oscar Udyog Limited
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 2332 (HC-KARNATAKA) · Income Tax Section 271(1)(c), 133A, 80IB(10)
-
Set off of loss pertaining to earlier year in which loss return was filed belatedly i.e., after the due date, does not result in concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income under section 271(1)(c).
CIT vs MAKINO ASIA PVT LTD
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 2331 (HC-KARNATAKA) · Income Tax Section 271(1)(c)
-
S. 194L - There cannot be any dispute that under Section 194L(2) proviso of the Income Tax Act, 1961, no deduction shall be made under Section 194L from any payment made on or before 01.06.2000. Thus, deduction made by the Land Acquisition Officer towards income tax, out of the compensation awarded is illegal. The Land Acquisition Officer could not have deducted any amount from out of the compensation awarded in favour of the petitioner after 01.06.2000. In the matter on hand, compensation is awarded to the petitioner after the year 2000. Therefore, the amount so deducted has to be returned to the petitioner.
Ashok B. Jadhav vs CIT
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 2327 (HC-KARNATAKA) · Income Tax Section 194L
-
Technical know-how is capital asset for depreciation purposes and sale thereof taxable as capital gain.
Commissioner of Income Tax vs Wintac Ltd
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 2320 (HC-KARNATAKA) · Income Tax Section 48
-
Goodwill was not covered for depreciation u/s 32 prior to 1997 amendment of the Act. The definition of actual cost under Section 43(1) of the Act cannot be read to cover goodwill as an asset for which the assessee had to pay and which can be termed as actual cost of the assets to the assessee. The Tribunal apportioned the cost of goodwill to various other assets acquired by the assessee thereby increasing the cost of other assets and allowing depreciation thereon, which, in our opinion, is not legally sustainable.
CIT vs WIPRO LTD
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 2315 (HC-KARNATAKA) · Income Tax Section 32, 43(1)
-
When a retiring partner takes only money towards the value of his share and when there is no distribution of capital asset/assets among the partners there is no transfer of a capital asset and consequently no profits or gains is payable under Section 45(4) of the Income Tax Act.
CIT vs M/S Dynamic Enterprises
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 2309 (HC-KARNATAKA) · Income Tax Section 45(4)
-
S. 45(4) not applies if retiring partner takes only money for his share & if there is no distribution of capital assets among partners
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX V/s. M/s DYNAMIC ENTERPRISES
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 2306 (HC-KARNATAKA)
-
HC quashed the Order rejecting application made by taxpayer for grant of NIL withholding tax certificate u/s 197 and held that It is a very cryptic one rejecting the application made by the petitioner under Section 197 of the Act without giving details as to the outstanding demand and as to whether the petitioner’s case falls within the scope of section 197 and the rules made thereunder or not.
VODAFONE CELLULAR LIMITED vs ACIT (TDS)
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 2305 (HC-KARNATAKA) · Income Tax Section 197
-
Allows filing of revised return during scrutiny/ assessment.
CIT vs AXA BUSINESS SERVICES PVT LTD
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 2269 (HC-KARNATAKA)
-
.
CIT vs HINDUSTAN LEVER LTD
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 2218 (HC-KARNATAKA) · Income Tax Section 194B, 201
-
.
IBM INDIA PVT LTD vs CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE & Others
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 2185 (HC-KARNATAKA)
-
Income-tax Act, 1961, s 127
IBM India Pvt Ltd v Commissioner of Income Tax
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 2171 (HC-KARNATAKA)
-
Income-tax Act, 1961, s 132
Pam Builders & Developers v Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 2107 (HC-KARNATAKA)
-
Income-tax Act, 1961, s 2(47), 54F.
Latha Ramachandra Inamdar v Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 2031 (HC-KARNATAKA)
-
Income-tax Act, 1961, s 240(b)
Dilip Surana v Commissioner of Income Tax
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 1965 (HC-KARNATAKA)
-
Income Tax Sections 10(10C), 35DDA, 263, Rule 2BA
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs STATE BANK OF MYSORE
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 1720 (HC-KARNATAKA) · Income Tax Sections 10(10C), 35DDA, 263, Rule 2BA
-
CBDT alone which will have to consider the claim of the petitioners to condone the delay
UNIQUE SHELTERS PVT. LTD vs UOI & Others
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 1660 (HC-KARNATAKA)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.