-
If land is purchased in director's name but is recorded in company's financials, it will not be considered as deemed dividend.
Shri Aloke Kumar Ghosh Vs ACIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20982 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
-
In the instant case, the payment of interest made by AT&S India to AT&S Austria on the one hand and the receipt of interest by AT&S Austria from AT&S India on the other hand have taken place under the same agreement i.e. Loan Agreement and Distribution Agreement. In this scenario, if the arm’s length interest rate is determined by the DRP at LIBOR plus 450 basis points in the hands of AT&S Austria, then the international transactions under consideration would never be at arm’s length in the hands of AT&S India.
AT & S AUSTRIA TECHNOLOGIE & SYSTEMTECHNIK AKTIONGESELLSCHAFT VERSUS DCIT, CIRCLE-11 (1), KOLKATA
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20978 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81752&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Value of the assets taken over by the company should be considered as the full value of consideration for the purpose of computation of capital gains under the Act. In this case, the full value of consideration is ₹ 2,70,69,200/-. This is also, the cost of acquisition of assets. As the cost of acquisition and the full value of consideration received on sale are the same figure, no capital gains has accrued or was received by the assessee.
RAVI JALAN VERSUS INCOME-TAX OFFICER, KOLKATA
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20885 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81462&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
AO sought to value shares as on 31.03.12 subsequent to the allotment of shares at premium of Rs. 400 as on 31.03.12, holds the same to be not permissible. Such method of computation is not laid down under any provisions of the Act. Thus the same is not in accordance with law.
Shri Ravi Jalan Vs Income Tax Officer
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20862 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · Section 56(2)(vii)(c)
-
Arm’s length price in the case of loans advanced to AE would be determined on the basis of rate of interest being charged in the country where the loan is received/consumed. The action of the assessee in adopting the bank rate prevailing in Australia is correct d the AO erred in adopting the India bank rate. The loan amount was given in Australia currency as per the promissory note the AE has to return the amount in Australia Dollar.
RUSSELL CREDIT LTD. VERSUS DCIT, CRICLE-8/ADDL. CIT RANGE-8, KOLKAKTA
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20861 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81414&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Hon'ble apex court’s landmark decision in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. K.Y. Pilliah & Sons to affirm both the lower authorities’ action treating the assessee’s share capital in question as unexplained cash credits liable to be added u/s.68 of the Act in entirety. Their lordships have made it clear that when this tribunal fully agrees with the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, it need not record separate reasons than those in the lower appellate discussion. The assessee fails in its solitary grievance therefore.
OVERTOP NINCOM PVT. LTD. VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7 (2), KOLKATA
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20860 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81415&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Arm’s length price in the case of loans advanced to AE would be determined on the basis of rate of interest being charged in the country where the loan is received/consumed. The action of the assessee in adopting the bank rate prevailing in Australia is correct d the AO erred in adopting the India bank rate. The loan amount was given in Australia currency as per the promissory note the AE has to return the amount in Australia Dollar.
NIPHA EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, KOLKATA
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20859 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81416&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Though we acknowledge that admission is a best piece of evidence, here on the facts of the case, admission alone cannot be the basis for mulcting the addition.
Uday Shankar Mahawar Vs ACIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20836 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
-
Performance bonus does not form part of salary as defined in clause (h) of Rule 2A for the purposes of Section 10(13A) of the Income tax Act, 1961.
SUDIP RUNGTA VERSUS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20828 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81330&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
No material brought on record by the lower authorities or before us by the Ld. DR to substantiate that the contribution towards development fund was not voluntary or that it was in exchange for the services provided by the assessee society to the payers. Onetime fee paid by members who are aware that it could be spent by assessee only towards capital purposes was in the nature of corpus donation and not taxable as income.
VIDYA BHARATI SOCIETY FOR EDUCATION & SCIENTIFIC ADVANCEMENT VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-1 (1), KOLKATA.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20822 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81308&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
There can hardly be any dispute that this statutory provision prescribes amortisation of capital expenditure relating to specified items only u/s 35D which have been incurred before the commencement of business or after the commencement of his business, in connection with the extension of its undertaking or in connection with his setting up a new industrial unit provided in sub-section 2(i) and (ii) of section 35D respectively.
DCIT, CC-2 (2), KOLKATA VERSUS M/S MBL INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20812 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81281&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The interest so earned thus was received by REC as well as all the Implementing Agencies including the assessee-company for and on behalf of the Government of India, Ministry of Power and since the same was to be used for cost of the project by way of adjustment in the last instalment of capital subsidy.
WEST BENGAL STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION CO. LIMITED VERSUS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2 (2), ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2 (2)
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20747 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81139&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Assessing Officer has recorded that he is not satisfied with the explanation given by the assessee on the suo moto disallowance. The assessee has also not given any working to justify the suo moto disallowance. He made certain claims without supporting the same with figures. Under these circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the Assessing Officer has recorded satisfaction, that he is unable to accept the suo moto disallowance made by the assessee u/s 14A of the Act, prior to invoking Rule 8D of the Rules.
ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6 (2) , KOLKATA VERSUS M/S. WILLIAMSON MAGOR AND COMPANY LIMITED
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20735 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81123&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
AO has in his assessment order assessed the income in question under the head income from profession, though in the body of the order, he was of the opinion that the income in question was assessable under the head income from salary. He simply disallowed the claim of exemption made by the assessee and assessed the gross receipts as professional income.
ARJUN CHANDRA BHOWAL VERSUS DCIT, CIRCLE-1, SILIGURI
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20715 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81043&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
There being no change in the facts and circumstances during the year under consideration, there is no justification of the AO in imputing interest income on the debit balance of the said partner and subjecting the same to tax in the hands of the assesse.
India Housing Vs DCIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20696 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
-
Pr. CIT could not set aside the order for alleged non-compliance with provision of law which no longer existed in the statute as on the date of order.
Eveready Industries India Ltd Vs Principal Commissioner of Income-tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20636 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · Sections 263, 40A(2)(b)
-
The amount in issue, which has been derived outside India and only credited in a bank account in India, does not attract sec. 5(2)(a) in case of a non-resident.
Dr. Kamal Kar Vs ACIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20573 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · Section 5(2)(a)
-
Admittedly no services were rendered in India for which the foreign assignment allowance was received by the assessee, the same was not chargeable to tax in India even in terms of the deeming provisions of Section 9(1)(ii), quashes revision u/s. 263.
Bodhisattva Chattopadhyay Vs Commissioner of Income-tax (IT & TP)
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20494 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
-
In order to bid for mining rights and obtain tenders from the government/local authorities to conduct mining, it is necessary for the bidder to have requisite credentials and past experience in the said field.
Shri Chandra Mohan Gupta Vs ITO
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20492 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
-
The aggregation of the share trading loss and profit from derivatives transaction should be done before application of Explanation to section 73 of the Act and since there was surplus profit on such aggregation, Explanation to section 73 would not be applicable.
Lohia Securities Ltd. Vs DCIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20447 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.