-
ITAT - Since part of loan was subsequently converted into equity, no TP adjustment can be made for interest free loans given to AE.
Shrenuj & Co. Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of Income-tax- Range 5 (3), Mumbai
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6849 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=41047&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Fees paid to overseas loan-arranger neither interest u/s 2(28A) nor fees for technical service (FTS) u/s 9(1)(vii), TDS u/s 195 not applicable.
Idea Cellular Limited vs ADIT
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6848 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section. 195
-
ITAT - Payment of ‘license fee’ and ‘management service fee’ by India Branch to its UK Head-office, not in the nature of ‘head office expenses’ u/s 44C. Addition to be deleted.
Lloyd’s Register Asia (India Branch Office) vs ACIT
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6847 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section. 44C
-
ITAT - Even if no business is carried, the expenditure incurred to maintain the corporate entity has to be allowed as a deduction u/s 37(1)
Preimus Investment and Finance Ltd vs. DCIT
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6843 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 37(1)
-
ITAT - Gift amounting to Rs. 160 crore received by assessee-company from other Indian corporate bodies is not taxable, being capital receipt for AY 2009-10.
DCIT. Vs. KDA enterprises
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6818 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
ITAT - Reason explained for delay (delay of 373 days) was that assessee-firm was having separate taxation department and it was under a bona fide belief that appeal had been filed by concerned head of taxation department within prescribed time. It will not constitute 'sufficient cause' for delay rather it was a case of gross negligence/inaction on part of assessee. No condonation of delay.
Cenzer Industries Ltd. v. Income-tax Officer 5 (1)(3), Mumbai
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6812 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=40908&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Interest cost and cost of acquisition are independent of each other, therefore interest on borrowed capital invested in shares not part of the ‘cost of acquisition’ while computing capital gains u/s 48 on sale of shares.
Natural Gas Company Pvt. Ltd vs. DCIT
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6804 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section. 48
-
ITAT - Where assessee did not have "ownership" but had "transferable tenancy rights" of flat giving possession, control and transferable right in flat, assessee was entitled for exemption u/s 54F.
Archana Parasrampuria v. Income-tax Officer, Ward-24 (1) (3), Mumbai
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6797 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=40868&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - If assessee is dealing with large volume of shares for which one has to devote considerable time and resources and has to carry out activities in a systematic manner, income from share transactions is taxable as business income.
Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax 25(3), Mumbai v. Vinod K. Sharda
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6794 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=40869&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - The transaction of allowing credit period to the AE on realisation of sale proceeds is not an independent transaction and has to be considered along with the main international transaction of sale of goods. Goldstar Jewellery Ltd and Kusum Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. followed
ACIT vs. Information Systems Resource Centre Pvt. Ltd
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6792 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
ITAT - Dept's practice of filing appeals in a routine manner and without application of mind deprecated as it causes inconvenience to taxpayers
DCIT vs. Prescon Builders Pvt. Ltd
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6779 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
ITAT - Law on treating purchases u/s 69C as "bogus" because the supplier is treated as a "hawala" dealer by the VAT authorities explained
ITO vs. Paresh Arvind Gandhi
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6778 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 69C
-
ITAT - Laments non-representation/ inept-representation of matters before it by the Revenue. Suggests guidelines to remedy the state of affairs
DCIT vs. Reliance Communications Infrastructure Ltd
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6746 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
ITAT - Where all relevant facts, material to computation of total income is duly furnished by assessee and no deficiencies in furnishing of such facts are pointed out by revenue authorities, declaration of additional income pursuant to survey will not invite concealment penalty.
Vipul Life Sciences Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 7 (3), Mumbai
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6735 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=39783&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - CIT(A) holding that assessee did not have PE in India as per DTAA without giving reasons, matter required readjudication
ADIT (IT)-1 (2), Mumbai v. Co-operative Centrale Raiffeisen
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6647 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=40696&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Where profit on sale of revaluation of securities was treated as business income, loss arising to bank on revaluation was also allowable.
Yes Bank Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax-7 (3), Mumbai
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6585 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=39459&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Since assessee was a shareholder of lending company and also had substantial interest in borrowing company therefore, loan given by lending company to borrowing company would be treated as deemed dividend in hands of assessee
Income-tax Officer-8 (2)-3, Mumbai v. Sahir Sami Khatib
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6581 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=40656&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Transfer Pricing adjustments made by the AO in contradiction to the mandatory instructions of the CBDT (Jurisdiction of the AO in making the assessment without referring the matter to the Transfer Pricing Officer where the value of international transactions exceeded ₹ 5 crores) is bad in law.
M/s. SG. Asia Holdings (India) Pvt. Ltd. Versus The ACIT
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6547 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenINTL.aspx?ID=8092&Category=INTLDecisions&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Sec 10B deduction not available to assessee in respect of TP addition made suo motu by the assessee as per Form 3CEB
Agilisys IT Services India Pvt Ltd vs ITO
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6502 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section. 10B
-
ITAT - As a TV anchor assessee is required to be presentable while hosting, and thus the expenditure incurred on his costumes should be considered for business purpose only
Karan Yash Johar Vs. DCIT
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6485 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.