-
ITAT - The estimate of the AO in assessing the income for the year under consideration was without any basis particularly when he himself assessed the income of the assessee at nil for the preceding assessment years.
DCIT, New Delhi vs. Style Syntex Pvt. Ltd.
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 7060 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
ITAT - Suo motu disallowance made by the assessee, is in excess to the disallowance with the working under 14A r.w. rule 8D, therefore disallowance U/s. 14A cannot be made.
Teletec Finsec India P. Ltd. vs. ITO
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 7058 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section. 14A
-
ITAT - CIT (A) has not given sufficient opportunity to the assessee and proceeded exparte qua assessee, which is contrary to the principles of natural justice.
Etisha Finance Investment P. Ltd. vs. ACIT
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 7056 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
Appeal filed ignoring monetary limits prescribed U/s. 268A could not be entertained
Income Tax Officer vs. M/s Delcia Food (India) Private Ltd.
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 7055 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section. 268A
-
ITAT - Provisions of Section 2(22)(e) have no application to non-registered shareholders.
IAG Promoters & Developers Pvt. Ltd. VS. ACIT
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 7036 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
ITAT - Assessee has valued the closing stock of finished goods at realizable value/sale price and as such there is no understatement of closing stock.
ACIT. Vs. Milton Cycle Industries Ltd.
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 7034 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
ITAT - Instruction No.5/14 dated 10.07.2014 issued by the CBDT are applicable for the pending cases also. Appeals should Not Be Filed in Cases Where Tax Effect not Exceeds Monetary Limits
ITO. Vs. Santosh Kumar (HUF)
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 7033 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
ITAT - Law on time limit for passing penalty order u/s 271(1)(c) explained. Challenge by assessee to validity of penalty order entertained in Dept's appeal despite lack of C. O. /cross-appeal by assessee.
ITO vs. Pandit Vijay Kant Sharma
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 7029 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 275(1)(a)
-
ITAT - Section 269SS does not apply to non-monetary book entry transactions of loans and advances. No penalty u/s 271D.
CIT vs. Mahagun Technologies Pvt. Ltd
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 7028 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 271D
-
ITAT - Appeal in the ITAT can be filed against order of the CIT(A) on a stay application. Stay should be granted if relevant criteria of existence of prima facie arguable case, irreparable loss and financial position are not considered by the CIT(A).
Bharat Heavy Electrical Ltd vs. ITO
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 7025 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 253
-
ITAT - Rectification order passed in a hasty manner, without giving hearing to Assessee, is clearly against the principles of natural justice.
Shri Sanjay Gupta v. ITO
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6996 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
ITAT - A functionally comparable company could not have been excluded simply because of high turnover only.
Agnity India Technologies (P.) Ltd. v. Income-tax Officer, Ward -1 (3), New Delhi
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6941 (ITAT-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenINTL.aspx?ID=8161&Category=INTLDecisions&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Where advance was given for purchase of capital assets, same would not be allowed as bad debts/business loss.
Hindustan Times Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6925 (ITAT-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=39131&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - In a case where undisclosed income is already charged to tax at a heavy rate of 60 percent (block assessment), the provisions like section 158BF relating to non-levy of interest and certain penalties in certain cases is justified.
ACIT. Vs. Sh. Akhil Jain
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6913 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 234B
-
ITAT - It cannot be stated that assessee has concealed income by furnishing inaccurate particulars of income and explanation given by the assessee cannot be brushed aside totally false. No concealment penalty.
M/s. Allgrow Finance & Investment Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6912 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
ITAT - AO has powers to determine actual cost of used asset under Section 43(1) (Explanation 3) after satisfying that its actual price of such asset had been inflated or deflated for an ulterior purpose.
Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-I, Meerut v. Jitender Kumar Gupta
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6900 (ITAT-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=40713&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Since rate of interest on loan given to AE was higher than rate prescribed under LIBOR, no transfer pricing adjustment in that regard was warranted.
Motherson Sumi Systems Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of Income-tax, Range-5, New Delhi
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6857 (ITAT-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenINTL.aspx?ID=8081&Category=INTLDecisions&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Two business models, namely, outsourcing services and providing in-house services cannot be compared with each other because of their inherent differences.
Xchanging Technology Services India (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-18 (1), New Delhi
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6851 (ITAT-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenINTL.aspx?ID=8112&Category=INTLDecisions&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Interest allowable u/s 36(1)(iii) with respect to loan taken by assessee for purchase of property. It is incorrect to hold that proportionate interest expenditure should be disallowed since assessee advanced interest-free loan to sister concern, which if utilized towards property-purchase, the interest component would have been reduced.
DCIT. Vs. International Institute of Planning & Management Pvt. Ltd.
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6846 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
ITAT - Loans and advances given for business transaction between the parties does not fall within the definition of “deemed dividend" /s 2(22)(e)
Ishwar Chand Jindal vs. ACIT
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6842 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 2(22)(e)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.