-
Prescribed authority viz., the DSIR is the authority in quantifying the expenditure incurred on in-house research and development facility by the company during the previous year and eligible for weighted deduction under sub-section (2AB) of section 35 of the Act in “Part B” of Form No. 3CL. There is no vested right of the tax payer in the procedures.
M/S. WABCO INDIA LIMITED VERSUS THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 3 (2) , CHENNAI.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20966 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81713&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Working in the late hours and passing this kind of cryptic order will not only affect the health of the officer but also prejudice the interest of the assessee. Though it may not be wrong to continue the hearing after office hours occasionally, hearing the appeals and making the tax practitioners, advocates and Chartered Accountants to wait till 9 PM to 10 PM on daily basis has to be avoided, and thus remits issue back to CIT(A) for re-examination.
Shri Shanmugam Senthilkumar Vs The Income Tax Officer
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20902 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
-
Even though the assessee is an eligible assessee, there is no variation to the international transactions. Therefore, there cannot be any prejudice to the interests of the assesse, passing of the draft assessment order itself is not warranted
Regen Renewable Energy Generation Global Limited Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20881 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
-
When the assessee is a recognized start-up company having filed declaration in Form 2, the provisions of Sec.56(2)(viib) shall not be made applicable.
M/s. Phasorz Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Vs The Income Tax Officer
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20872 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Section 56(2)(viib)
-
Authorities below have not dissected the various investments vis-à-vis dividend income received by the assessee and the matter need to be remanded back to the file of AO for fresh adjudication after considering and analyzing various investments made by the assessee vis-a-vis dividend income received which was claimed as an exempt income.
M/S. LAKSHMI MACHINE WORKS LTD. VERSUS THE ADDL. CIT, CORPORATE RANGE, COIMBATORE.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20870 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81422&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The above facts clearly points to one and only irresistible conclusion that these gains earned by assessee were bogus and sham transactions to convert her unaccounted money into legitimate money through circuitous route of sale and purchase of listed shares of M/s Turbotech Engineering Limited which is a penny stock and the assessee is trying to take advantage of exemption provision as enshrined u/s 10(38).
Smt. Sudha Eashwar Vs The Income Tax Officer
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20796 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Section 10(38)
-
On mere reading of provisions of Section 54 of the Act, it would be clear that statute has not laid down condition for the assessee in order to get the benefit of Section 54 of the Act, the actual sale consideration received on sale of original asset should be utilized for acquisition of new house property.
RAJYASHREE SHYAM VERSUS THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 18 (1) CHENNAI
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20767 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81184&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Only land which is appurtenant to residential house can be considered for claiming deduction u/s 54 which is a question of fact which requires investigation into facts and the facts may differ from case to case. The land may be integral part but the same may not necessarily be appurtenant to the building thereon as the same may not be required for enjoyment of the Building situated on the land.
Shri Maduranthagam Selvaraj Ravi Vs The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20725 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Section 54
-
The decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Zylog is a recent judgment pronounced on 23.04.2019 and we are bound by decision of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court affirming ratio of decision of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Synopsis which was decided in favour of Revenue.
The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs M/s.Saipem India Projects Pvt. Ltd.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20685 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
-
If for any reason, the assessee fails to appear before the CIT(Appeals) after receipt of notice of hearing, it is open to the CIT(Appeals) to dispose the appeal on merit after re-appreciating the material available on record, including the assessment record.
ETA Star Tech City Pvt. Ltd Vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20661 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
-
Since, the basic facts are not disputed and the assessee gained from its capital rights, as pleaded by the assessee, the gain which arose out of the transaction is assessable under the head long term capital gains only.
Shri Narayan Agarwal Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20635 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Section 54
-
ITAT - Wherever the assessee failed to rebut the factual position on the basis of which addition was made, the levy of penalty u/s.271(1) (c) was justified even though AO had not struck off the relevant limb in the show cause notice.
Muthukumaran Rangarajan Vs The Income Tax officer
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20622 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
-
ITAT - Property acquired by way of a perpetual lease constitutes 'purchase' for the purpose of exemption u/s 54F.
Shri N. Ramaswamy Vs The Income Tax Officer
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20610 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Section 54F
-
The addition representing the disallowance of the income earned from the vegetable crops and the disallowance out of the agricultural operation expenditure is unsustainable.
Chandra Mouli Chowdary (HUF) Vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20597 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
-
PCIT cannot exercise the power of revision to look into any other issue which the AO himself could not look.
Smt. Padmavathi Vs The ITO
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20571 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Section 263
-
The taxing authorities exercise quasi-judicial powers and in doing so they must act in a fair and not a partisan manner.
Kingston Educational Trust Vs The DCIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20570 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Section 143(1)
-
Depreciation was allowable both on the excess amount paid towards goodwill and non compete agreement.
The Asst. Commissioner of Income- tax (OSD) Vs M/s.Dorma India Pvt. Ltd.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20535 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
-
The transaction of subscription to the chits is independent of the earlier transaction of loans borrowed and there is nothing on record to show that both the transactions are interconnected.
The Assistant Director of Income Tax Vs M/s. Sree Gokulam Educational and Medical Trust
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20533 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Sections 11, 11(5)
-
Sec.271AAB(2) specifically excludes the application of Sec.271(c).
Shri Sunil Ravindranath Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20532 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Sections 271AAB, 271(1)(c)
-
The windmill is an independent one and can function independently and the expenditure incurred on the new windmill cannot be allowed as revenue expenditure.
Pandian Chemicals Limited Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20493 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.