-
There is nothing on record to which it can be assumed that the own money has been introduced on account of demerger of the investment division of Hemant Tools Pvt. Ltd.
DCIT Vs M/s. Jayvik Foresight Innovations and Solutions Pvt. Ltd.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 23124 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 68
-
Payment of TDS by the assessee would relate back to the date of presentation of cheques by the assessee to the banker.
STANDARD CHARTERED BANK VERSUS DCIT (TDS) -2 (2) , MUMBAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 23120 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=84483&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Neither the issuance of the notice u/s 143(2) to the amalgamating company i.e a non-existent entity be construed as a notice issued to the amalgamated company, nor the same be validated by bringing it within the realm of a procedural irregularity within the meaning of Sec. 292B.
Siemens Limited Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 23102 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 143(2)
-
When the assessee company had been assessed to tax under the deeming provisions of Sec. 115JB of the Act, no penalty u/s 271(1)(c) in respect of additions/disallowances made under the normal provisions of the Act could have been imposed upon the assessee.
M/s Flemingo Travel Retail Limited Vs DCIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 23101 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 271(1)(c)
-
The provisions of section 50C of the Act could not be applied to sale development rights of land owned by the assessee.
M/s. Network Construction Company Vs ACIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 23095 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 50C
-
The payment of Rs.89 lakhs on account of pension to wholetime Directors on the basis of Board resolution of the assessee company was incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business of the assessee and was allowable as deduction.
ACIT Vs M/s. Tata Sons Ltd.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 23088 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 36(1)(iii)
-
In the case of the assessee herein on 07-11-2001, the investigation wing of department after almost one year has only converted the non-existent prohibitory order into deemed seizure, and therefore in the present case the panchnama dated 07-11-2001 is only for the purposes of extending the limitation period.
Narang International Hotels Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 23087 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
In all the co-ordinate bench decisions, there was no discussion to the connotations of the expression paid and these decisions simply proceeded on the basis that because the expression paid was used in Article 11(1) of Indo Cyprus tax treaty, the taxability of interest could only be on cash basis.
Ampacet Cyprus Limited Vs Dy Commissioner of Income Tax International Taxation
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 23084 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Since, the goodwill is an intangible asset within the meaning of Section 32 of the Act in the form of industrial, business and commercial rights, the assessee would be eligible for depreciation u/s.32 of the Act.
M/s. Classic Stripes Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 23083 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
The assessee could not be said to be Associated Entity of M/s DBPL in terms of Article-10 of the Treaty. Hence, the conclusion drawn by AO, in this regard, could not be sustained as per the Treaty terms.
Next Gen Films Private Ltd. Vs ITO
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 23074 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
The second notice issued u/s 148 of the Act on 29/3/2011 is bad in law and the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are vitiated.
Johnson & Johnson Private Limited Vs Additional Commissioner of Income Tax
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 23047 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
AO cannot change the method adopted by the assessee for valuing the market value of the shares from discounted cash flow method to net asset value method by merely relying on the actual results in the subsequent years and arbitrarily coming to the conclusion that projections were not achieved.
Karmic Labs Pvt.Ltd. Vs ITO
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 23014 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Since assessment was made under regular provisions, the assessee was allowed to carry forward deficit of earlier years and set off against current year income in accordance with the provisions of the Act.
KWA Trust Vs Income Tax Officer
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 23004 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 11
-
Stamp duty expenses incurred for taking the property under consideration on lease for a period of 33 years was to be construed as an intangible asset within the meaning of Sec. 32(1)(ii), and thus eligible for depreciation, cannot be accepted. Apart from that, we are also unable to comprehend that as to how a simpliciter payment of stamp duty expenses on the lease agreement (pending registration), would bring into existence an intangible asset of the same genus, as that of the six specified categories of assets, viz., knowhow, patents, copyrights, trademarks, licenses or franchises, as contemplated in Sec. 32(1)(ii).
GOLDMOHAR DESIGN AND APPAREL PARK LTD. VERSUS PR. CIT-7, MUMBAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22997 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=84216&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Where assessee was having substantial rights in property as tenant (sub-tenant) and it was not merely a licence holder, amount received on surrender of such tenancy/sub-tenancy rights would be taxable as capital gains.
Yogini Mohit Sahita Vs ITO
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22986 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
The instant case, Smt. Saraswati Vithaldas Sahita occupied the said flat at 2nd floor of the building known as Gangasagar on license basis. This is crystal clear from the Consent Term before the Hon'ble Court of Small Causes at Mumbai, quoted at length earlier. After demise of Mrs. Saraswati Vithaldas Sahita, her son Shri Vidyut Sahita occupied the said flat with his family.
YOGINI MOHIT SAHITA VERSUS ITO, WARD-2 (1) (3), MUMBAI.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22982 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=84151&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Revenue by assessing the LTCG in the hands of the assessee had sought to tax a hypothetical income, which finds its roots in a transaction which had never fructified into a sale transaction.
Futura Polyster Limited Vs ITO
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22973 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Assessee's consistent TNMM methodology has been rejected by Ld. TPO without any sound basis. Although the principle of res-judicate are not applicable to Income Tax proceedings, however, the rule of consistency would debar the revenue to change its stand in difference assessment years without any sound basis, facts and circumstances being identical.
M/S. LUBRIZOL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -LTU, MUMBAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22965 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=84129&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The interim order is treated as inoperative.
Tata Education and Development Trust Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22959 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 254(2A)
-
In the instant case, appellant only provides service by using its hardware/security devices/personnel and not use of any software. The appellant is only providing IDC service which includes administration and supervision of central infrastructure, mailbox hosting services and website hosting services.
EDENRED PTE LTD., C/O SRBC ASSOCIATES & LLP VERSUS THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) -3 (2) , -MUMBAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22953 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=84122&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.