-
Genuine hardship being faced by assessee is required to be taken into account & in genuine cases discretion has to be exercised, if there is delay in filing returns.
NAVANIDHI VIVIDHODDESHA SAHAKARA SANGHA LTD
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26053 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Sections 80P & 119(2)(b)
-
Section 36(1)(vii) of the Act mandates that in order to claim bad debts, the assessee has to write off the same in its books and the assessee is not required to prove that the debt is irrecoverable.
Big Bags International (P) Ltd Vs The DCIT
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26013 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Section 36(1)(vii)
-
When there is an issue of bonus shares, the money remains with the company and nothing comes to the shareholders as there is no transfer of the property and the provisions of Sec.56(2) (vii)(c) are not attracted.
The DCIT Vs DR. RANJAN PAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24906 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Section 56(2)(vii)
-
In the instant case, Revenue failed to record any satisfaction with regard to genuineness of the claim of the assessee before invoking the powers u/s 14A read with Rule 8D and in the absence of recording such satisfaction, Rule 8D could not have been invoked.
Hindustan Aeronautics Limited Vs ACIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24865 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Section 37
-
The ten year period u/s 10B would begin from the AY in which assessee first claimed the deduction.
Saint Gobain Crystals & Detectors (I) Limited Vs DCIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24823 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Section 10B
-
A building legally comes into existence only on issuance of an occupancy certificate.
Brigade Enterprises Ltd Vs The Add. CIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24811 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Section 22
-
There is no obligation in law for deduction of tax at source on payments made for reimbursement of costs incurred by a non-resident enterprise and therefore the amount paid by the assessee was not amenable to witholding u/s 195.
Abbey Business Services India Pvt Ltd Vs The Director Of Income Tax
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24803 (HC-KARNATKATA)
-
If infraction of procedural provision does not provide for any consequences, such a provision has to be construed as directory.
Wipro Limited Vs DCIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24767 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Section 10B
-
Interpretation of statutes & DTAAs: The substitution of a provision results in repeal of earlier provision and its replacement by new provision. When a new rule in place of an old rule is substituted, the old one is never intended to keep alive and the substitution has the effect of deleting the old rule and making the new rule operative. Though Notification dated 18.07.2005 (which substitutes paragraph 12 of Article 12 of the DTAA to provide for levy of tax on the royalties or fees for technical services at a rate not exceeding 10%) issued u/s 90 came into force with effect from 01.08.2005, it applies to the entire fiscal year
DIT vs. Autodesk Asia Pvt Ltd
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24734 (HC-KARNATKATA)
-
The assessee has incurred an expenditure which gives him enduring benefit, therefore, the same has to be treated as capital expenditure.
M/S. TELCO CONSTRUCTION CO. LTD Vs THE ACIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24726 (HC-KARNATKATA)
-
The expression expenditure will also include a loss and therefore, issuance of shares at a discount where the assessee absorbs the difference between the price at which it is issued and the market value of shares would also be expenditure incurred for the purposes of Sec.37(1).
M/S BIOCON LTD. Vs The CIT, The DCIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24672 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Section 37
-
ITAT - The expression 'expenditure' also includes a loss and therefore, issuance of shares at a discount where the assessee absorbs the difference between the price at which it is issued and the market value of the shares would also be expenditure incurred for the purposes of Section 37(1).
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX LTU BANGALORE., THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX LTU, BANGALORE VERSUS M/S. BIOCON LTD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24663 (HC-KARNATKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83739&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
In the instant case AS-9 applies as financial service rendered by the assessee, which results in revenue, which in turn has to be taken into account having regard to incidence of costs relating to service.
Medi Assist (India) Tpa Pvt. Ltd Vs CIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24641 (HC-KARNATKATA)
-
Irrespective of the nature of training expenses, assessee's business of transmitting data of qualified personnel, electronically, from its database would fall under human resource services as per CBDT notification making assessee eligible for deduction u/s Sec. 10A.
NTT Data Global Advisory Services Pvt. Ltd Vs The CIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24639 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Section 10A
-
The stock option being a right to purchase the shares underlying the options is a capital asset in the hands of the assessee under Section 2(14) of the Act.
Chittharanjan A. Dasannacharya Vs The CIT, The ACIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24583 (HC-KARNATKATA)
-
The income, being in the nature of hypothetical income did not accrue to the assessee and is not subject to tax in view of Accounting standard 9.
Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Ltd Vs The CIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24571 (HC-KARNATKATA)
-
The expression general public utility as a benefit to a section of public distinguished from specified individuals, not necessarily beneficial to the whole of mankind.
ISKCON CHARITIES Vs The Director Of Income Tax
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24570 (HC-KARNATKATA)
-
The assessee can compute tax at the rate beneficial to it which is in accordance of provisions of Section 90(2) of the Act, wherein the expression to the extent makes it evident that provisions of the Act or Treaty, whichever is beneficial, is applicable to the assessee.
IBM World Trade Corporation Vs The Director of Income Tax
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24432 (HC-KARNATKATA)
-
It is noteworthy here that 5th proviso to Section 32(1) of the Act restricts the total depreciation which can be claimed in case of succession etc. to depreciation which would have been allowable had there been no succession.
Padmini Products (P) Ltd Vs The DCIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24425 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Section 32(1)
-
In respect of non- residents, Sec. 195 puts an obligation on the payer, i.e. any person responsible for paying to a non-resident, to deduct income-tax at source at the rates in force and thus the entire tax is to be deducted at source which is payable on such payments made by the payer to the non-resident.
Texas Instruments Incorporated Vs The Director Income Tax
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24369 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Section 234B
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.