-
In the case of a capital asset, if it is transfer under any of the provisions of section 2(47), coupled with handing over of possession of the capital asset, capital gain is to be offered on mercantile basis in the year in which the possession is given. As rightly pointed out by the CIT(A) in the case of the assessee, the land has been treated as stock-in-trade and the assessee has only contributed its portion of land to the JDA and is liable to offer business income in the year in which the stock-in-trade is sold. The CIT(A) has observed that the assessee has offered business profits in the AYs 2015-16 and 2016-17 i.e. the years in which the Villas have been sold.
DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE – 2 (4) , HYDERABAD. VERSUS CLEAN CITY ESTATES PVT. LTD., HYDERABAD
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22563 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83395&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
By virtue of the said agreement cum GPA, assessee has parted with his right in the property because he had received the entire sale consideration and has also handed over the possession of the said property. The vendee becomes the owner of the property u/s.53A of the TP Act and u/s.2(47) of the IT Act, it is a transfer of the property.
Sama Om Reddy Vs The Income Tax Officer
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22545 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
-
Capital contribution by the partners cannot be treated as income of the assessee and if the partners are not able to explain the sources for their investment, the AO can only make the addition in the hands of the partners and not in the hands of the assessee firm.
Jayashree Anand Enterprises Vs ITO
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22517 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · Section 69
-
The assessee is not benefitting in any way by not filing the appeal in time before the Tribunal. The assessee has explained the reasons as misplacement of papers by one of the office staff. This is one of the possible reasons for not being able to file the appeal within the time. Further, after hearing the assessee on merits also, we find that the assessee has an arguable case on merits.
M/S. SHAKTI HORMANN PVT. LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS SHAKTI MET DOR LTD) VERSUS DCIT, CIRCLE-3 (1) , HYDERABAD
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22493 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83283&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. KF Bioplants (P) Ltd has condoned the delay of 1845 days in filing of the appeal by the Revenue on the ground that the failure of the revenue to remove the objection within time was an unintentional lapse and admission of the appeal by itself would not cause any prejudice to the assessee therein.
SHRI D. PEDDA REDDAIAH VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 PRODDATUR
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22489 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83290&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Where any assessee had not carried on any business activity, it cannot be presumed to have earned any income. Assessee has not carried on any business activity and earned any income. In such circumstances, it could only have received capital contribution from the partners.
JAYASHREE ANAND ENTERPRISES, HYDERABAD. VERSUS INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD – 11 (3) , HYDERABAD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22459 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83179&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
By virtue of the AGPA dt.29-11-2006, the assessee has parted with his right in the property because he had received the entire sale consideration as agreed to between both the parties and has also handedover the vacant possession of the property to the Vendee therein. It is also stated therein that the GPA is given to the Vendee for the convenience of the purchaser for doing the necessary acts and things on behalf of the Vendor and the Vendee therein.
SAMA OM REDDY, HYDERABAD VERSUS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-8 (2) , HYDERABAD
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22438 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83084&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Without following the procedure as contemplated u/s. 144C of the Act the AO issued demand notice and penalty notice. Thereby, in our opinion, the final assessment order 28-04-2014 passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(3) of the Act lacked validity and it is liable to be quashed.
VANDERLANDE INDUSTRIES B.V., C/O VIPL VERSUS ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) – II, HYDERABAD
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22422 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83022&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
It is not in dispute that the assessee has obtained the cash from his own brother-in-law. It is also not in dispute that the assessee obtained the cash loan for the purpose of acquiring immovable property wherein he was constrained to resciend the agreement in the event the balance purchase consideration is not paid within the stipulated time and in such event the transaction has to be reversed.
A. VIJAY KUMAR, HYDERABAD. VERSUS DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE – 4 (1) , HYDERABAD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22325 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82627&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Though the Act mandates Tax Residency Certificate of Austria, non-production of the same before the Ld. Revenue Authorities shall not enable the Ld. Revenue Authorities not to grant the benefit of the Treaty to the assesse.
Sreenivasa Reddy Cheemalamarri Vs Income-tax Officer
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22233 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
-
There is no transfer of property by the assessees in fact it is acquisition of property by the assessees in the names of their children and it is not the case of transfer or gain on sale of property.
Smt. R.Mangala Devi Vs Income Tax Officer
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22232 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
-
Explanation to section 80IA(4) makes it clear that infrastructure facility means a water supply project, water treatment system, irrigation project, sanitation and sewage system or solid waste management system. From the above, it is abundantly clear that the assessee shall be entitled for deduction u/s. 80IA(4) with respect to operating and maintaining of the water treatment system / water supply project. It is also clear that the assessee is not a developer but only operating and maintaining the water treatment system / water supply project.
THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-17 (2), HYDERABAD. VERSUS M/S. WATERLIFE INDIA PVT. LTD. (VICE-VERSA)
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21066 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81953&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Assessee utilized 100% capabilities of employees without allowing the employees on bench, it had no idle employees on its rolls, it incurred no interest costs and it paid a rent amounting to 0.5% of revenue whereas in other cases it was around 5%.
Annapurna Business Solutions Vs Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20791 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · Section 10A
-
Liability of the assessee to pay at the revised price is an ascertained liability and not a contingent liability as held by the Revenue. The assessee was liable to pay the revised charges w.e.f. 1.12.2008 but the revised charges were not finalized though the maximum price which could be revised or increased was mentioned in the communication from GAIL. DR’s submissions that the price is fixed by the Govt. is also strictly not correct.
ANDHRA PRADESH GAS POWER CORPORATION LIMITED VERSUS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1 (1), HYDERABAD
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20750 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81133&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Land deal in question was made by the appellant. Mis SMV agencies is also a company in the same group and the entire management is made by the aforementioned two persons. There is no doubt that a substantial amount of on money was paid and these amounts are clearly written in cash in the papers referred to supra.
CHARMINAR BOTTLING COMPANY PVT. LTD. VERSUS ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE – 8 (1) , HYDERABAD.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20749 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81134&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The liability to pay the revised price had accrued during the relevant A.Ys when GAIL had intimated the likely revision of the price and only date of the payment thereof was uncertain and therefore, the provision has to be allowed as per the mercantile system of accounting followed by the assesse. There is an implicit obligation of the assessee to pay the revised price, the liability of the assessee to pay at the revised price is an ascertained liability and not a contingent liability as held by the Revenue.
A.P. Gas Power Corporation Ltd Vs Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20537 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · Section 37
-
What has to be disallowed under Explanation 1 to Sec.37(1) of the Act is a payment made, for contravention of laws in force in India and not of any foreign country.
Mylan Laboratories Limited Vs Dy.CIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20431 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
-
The assessee would be eligible for benefit of deduction u/s 54F towards the independent houses received provided other conditions stipulated in the act are fulfilled.
Sri Potla Nageswara Rao Vs Income Tax Officer
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20398 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
-
From the penalty order, we find that the assessee has not filed any Explanation before the A.O. except requesting the A.O. to keep the proceedings in abeyance till the assessee’s appeal before the ITAT is disposed of. The AO, however, concluded the proceedings by observing that the assessee has not submitted any explanation to the show cause notice dated 14.3.2012 issued u/s 271AAA r.w.s. 274.
JANARDHAN REDDY BEKKERY, HYDERABAD. VERSUS ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3 (PRESENTLY DCIT, CIRCLE – 6 (1) HYDERABAD.)
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20230 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=78291&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The intention of the legislature for giving the exemption u/s 80IB(11A) is to promote agro processing industries as is evident from the Finance Ministers speech and also memorandum explaining the amendments to the bill. There is no doubt that oil palm fresh fruit bunches are agricultural products. They may not be edible in their raw or ripe form, but they extract therefore after processing is edible. The language used in the section itself is processing, preservation and packaging of fruits or vegetables. Thus, the legislature was aware of the fact that certain fruits and vegetables would require processing and preservation for their long shelf-life. As long as the end product is also consumable it cannot be denied exemption u/s 80IB(11A). Therefore we are satisfied that the oil palm fruits are fruits u/s 80IB(11A) of the Act.
3F OIL PALM AGROTECH PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2 (2) , HYDERABAD
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20062 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77598&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.