-
The commission payments to non-resident agents would not be taxable in India and where a non-resident has no permanent establishment in India, there can be no liability either under the domestic law or under DTAA.
SQS India BFSI Ltd Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28113 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
-
The individual’s stay outside India was more than 183 days, and therefore, the amount was not taxable in India by virtue of Article 14 of India-Japan DTAA.
Sundaram Clayton Ltd Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28087 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Sections 40(a)(i), 195
-
An undertaking, being the unit, which had already availed, before the commencement of the Special Economic Zones Act, 2005, the deductions referred to in section 10A for ten consecutive years, such unit shall not be eligible for deduction from income under this section.
M/S. CLASSIC LINENS INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD. VERSUS THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, OSD, COMPANY RANGE-I, CHENNAI
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 28041 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=94731&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Addition made by the A.O is being deleted.
SHRI ATHAVULLAH VERSUS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, VELLORE.
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 28040 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=94732&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Penalty is mandatory where the Assessee has admitted undisclosed income during the course of search in the statement recorded u/s 132(4).
N.Santhanam Vs The Assistant Commissioner Income Tax
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27918 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Sections 271AAB, 273B
-
If an assessee filed a declaration and pay specified taxes as per the scheme and withdraw the appeal pending before the appellate authorities, the Designated Authority shall pass an order in Form 5 confirming payment made under the scheme and grant immunity from penalty and prosecution.
Ratna Foundation Vs The Income Tax Officer
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27908 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
-
Where no revisional order was passed by CIT at the time of completion of original assessment, limitation period for passing order u/s.263 had to commence from first order of assessment.
M/S. SEYAD SHARIAT FINANCE LTD. VERSUS THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-2, CHENNAI.
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27277 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=92027&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
As long as an exempt income was earned, the expenditure incurred as attributable to earning such exempt income, had to be disallowed under section 14A. Assessing Officer is directed to consider only those investments for computing average value of investment which yielded exempt income during the year under consideration as per Rule 8D(2)(iii).
M/S. CHETTINAD BUILDERS P. LTD. [NOW MERGED WITH M/S. CHETTINAD PRODUCTS AND SERVICES P. LTD.] VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1 (2), CHENNAI.
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27276 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=92028&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
When the assessee constructs building on leasehold land without ownership, then cost incurred for construction of building is revenue expenditure which deductible.
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-I TIRUPUR VERSUS M/S. EASTMAN EXPORTS GLOBAL CLOTHING PVT. LTD.
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27027 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=91287&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Although payment made to said company is not covered under Article 14, but said payment is covered under Article 7 of DTAA between India and USA.
Sundaram Business Ltd Vs The Income Tax Officer
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26423 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
-
Issue price is not justifiable as per any scientific method or Rule 11UA.
Sindya Securities and Investments Pvt.Ltd. Vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26329 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
-
Though the reason given by Assessee for filing the appeal is neither convincing nor satisfactory, since the assessee intends to go for VIvad-Se-Vishwas Scheme and pay the resulting taxes and put an end to the litigation, we are convinced that the delay needs to be condoned as a special case.
Shri Subramanyan Kumar Vs The ACIT
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26328 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
-
For invoking the provisions of section 41(1), the prerequisite is that the liability sought to be treated as income must have been claimed as a deduction during any earlier AYs and in the present year, the assessee must have derived some benefit on account of remission or cessation of liability.
Ravindra Arunachala Nadar Vs The ACIT
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26314 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Section 41(1)
-
Service tax paid out of pocket is an item of expenses deductible u/s 37(1).
FIH India Private Limited Vs The DCIT
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26290 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Section 37
-
Expenses towards gifts given to the doctors by the assessee are nothing but sales promotion, which, are allowable under section 37(1).
ICARUS Health Care P Ltd Vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26289 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Section 37
-
FMV needs to be substantiated only when valuation is done under Expl. (a)(ii) and not under Expl. (a)(i) to Sec. 56(2)(viib).
Sakthi Textiles Ltd Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26219 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Section 56(2)(viib)
-
Up to AY 2019-20, compensation received for termination of any agreement cannot be taxed u/s.28(ii)(e) of the Act.
Sai Mirra Innopharm Private Limited Vs The Income Tax Officer
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26185 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Section 28(va)(a)
-
Once compensation is exempt from tax by virtue of Section 96, then any enhanced compensation or interest payable on such enhanced compensation cannot be brought to tax as interest income, which is taxable u/s.56(2)(viii) of the IT Act.
SV Global Mill Ltd Vs The ACIT
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26168 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
-
Assessee is not entitled for exemption u/s.54F of the Act for purchase of two residential houses at two different locations on two different dates. The position remains same even after amendment to section 54F by the Finance Act, 2014 w.e.f. 01.04.2015.
Mr. M.S.Amaresan Vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 24957 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Section 54F
-
As per Sub-section (3) of Section 153 of the Act, an order of fresh assessment in pursuance of an order u/s.263 of the Act, setting aside or cancelling an assessment, may be made at any time before the expiry of nine months from the end of the financial year in which the order u/s.263 of the Act is passed by the Commissioner.
M/s. Ejaz Tannin Company Vs The ACIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24880 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.