Search
Advanced Search Search with field filters
/adv
Navigation
Home Go to homepage
/home
Direct Tax Income Tax resources
GST GST Acts, Rules & Case Laws
Company Law Companies Act & SEBI
Due Date Tracker Statutory compliance deadlines
/due
Due Date Calendar Calendar view of compliance deadlines
Daily Digest Today's tax updates and articles
/digest
Landmark Rulings

ITAT Mumbai — Direct Tax

2,432 rulings

  1. ITAT Mumbai · 27 Jul 2020
    Sec.40A(2)(b) disallowance is deleted in respect of the interest-free deposit given by the assessee employer to the landlord for providing accommodation to the employee.

    Morgan Stanley India Company Private Limited Vs ACIT

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22947 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 40A(2)

  2. ITAT Mumbai · 27 Jul 2020
    Revenues under the IDC agreement ought not to be taxed in the hands of the assessee as royalty under the Act and India-Singapore DTAA.

    Edenred Pte Ltd. Vs The Deputy Director of Income Tax

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22946 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  3. ITAT Mumbai · 27 Jul 2020
    Since this Bench last assembled on June 15, 2020, the situation arising out of the pandemic is yet to improve. To serve the ends of justice, the interim order initially passed on March 26, 2020, shall stand extended till August 31, 2020.

    Cleared Secured Services Pvt. Ltd Vs DCIT

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22945 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  4. ITAT Mumbai · 27 Jul 2020
    As could be seen from the facts on record, identical addition of interest on interest free security deposit was made by the AO in assessee's own case in the assessment year 2012–13. When the dispute ultimately came up for consideration before the Tribunal The Tribunal after considering the submissions of the parties and relevant facts and materials on record, though, upheld the decision of the Assessing Officer in computing interest on interest free security deposit received by the assessee, however, the quantum was reduced from 10% to 9%.

    DEENA ASIT MEHTA VERSUS DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE–4 (1) (1), MUMBAI

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22943 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=84104&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  5. ITAT Mumbai · 25 Jul 2020
    On verification of the TDS certificate in Form no.16A, by Unity Infra Projects Ltd., learned Commissioner (Appeals) has also recorded a finding of fact that such certificate shows labour charges. As rightly observed by Commissioner (Appeals), AO has not made any in–depth enquiry to ascertain the correctness of assessee's claim regarding the receipt of labour charges. By simply issuing a notice under section 133(6) of the Act to Unity Infra Projects Ltd., the AO has finished his part of the job without pursuing the concerned party any further even after not receiving any reply.

    INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD–26 (2) (3) , MUMBAI VERSUS MOHD. IRSAD MOHD. SAMIULLAH ALAM

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22935 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=84087&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  6. ITAT Mumbai · 25 Jul 2020
    In the instant case, the appellant acts as the central coordinator for all Damco entities across the globe. As a central coordinator, the appellant procures from various service providers viz. insurance, procurement of various product and information technology related support services etc. needed by Damco entities across the globe. The appellant enters into MSA with Damco operating entities and therefore, recovers the cost of procurement/provision from these entities. All these costs are only reimbursed to the appellant and there is no mark-up.

    DAMCO INTERNATIONAL A/S, C/O. DAMCO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) -2 (1) (1), MUMBAI

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22934 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=84088&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  7. ITAT Mumbai · 24 Jul 2020
    Reimbursement of cost cannot be taxable in India being devoid of any profit element/income.

    Damco International Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International taxation)-2(1)(1)

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22931 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  8. ITAT Mumbai · 24 Jul 2020
    The only verification required, was with respect to the extent to which such income is applied for such purposes outside India, and not as to how the contributions to Cornwell University USA and Harvard University USA tend to promote the international welfare in which India is interested.

    Tata Education and Development Trust Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22929 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 11

  9. ITAT Mumbai · 22 Jul 2020
    The AO erroneously treated the assessee as a mutual association instead of charitable organization merely on the ground that services were rendered by the assessee to its members.

    M/s. Confederation of Indian Textile Industry Vs ITO

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22927 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Sections 2(15), 11

  10. ITAT Mumbai · 24 Jul 2020
    There is no reference whatsoever to the incriminating material found during the course of search upon the assessee on the basis of which this addition of unsecured loan has been done in the hands of the assessee under section 153A.

    MR. RAJESH PODDAR VERSUS DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 7 (4) , MUMBAI

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22925 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=84080&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  11. ITAT Mumbai · 24 Jul 2020
    The mandate of law, even where a concluded assessment is sought to be reopened by the A.O within a period of 4 years from the end of the relevant assessment year, it is must that the A.O has fresh material or information with him, that had led to the formation of belief on his part that the income of the assessee chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. Our aforesaid view is fortified by the judgments in the case of NYK Lime (India) Ltd.and Purity Tech Textile Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT & Anr.

    M/S MEDLEY PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. VERSUS DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-10 (2) (2), MUMBAI

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22924 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=84082&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  12. ITAT Mumbai · 23 Jul 2020
    When database access by itself does not result in taxation as royalty, such database access being coupled with software licence cannot bring the software consideration within the scope of royalty.

    Reliance Corporate IT Park Ltd. Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22916 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  13. ITAT Mumbai · 22 Jul 2020
    The list of QIBs to whom shares are issued, the shares are not issued to any of the aforesaid category. Thus QIBs, not being promoters, promoter group, subsidiaries and associates of the company would qualify as public.

    Yes Bank Limited Vs Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22911 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  14. ITAT Mumbai · 21 Jul 2020
    In quantum appeals before the Tribunal in The Tribunal held that the assessee and KEPL Singapore is not associated enterprises (AE). It was held that no arms length price adjustment could be made on the transaction between assessee and KEPL.

    KAYBEE PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS ITO-10 (1) (3) , MUMBAI

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22902 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=84046&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  15. ITAT Mumbai · 21 Jul 2020
    As established beyond doubt that the re–opening of assessment is not on the basis of any tangible material but on a mere change of information. AO has re–opened the assessment after expiry of four years there is no allegation either in the assessment order or anywhere else stating that the escapement of income was due to failure on the part of the assessee to disclose all material facts relating to his income truly and correctly. Accordingly, the condition enshrined in section 147 is not fulfilled. For the aforesaid reasons, we agree with Commissioner (Appeals) that the re–opening of assessment under section 147 of the Act in the present case is invalid.

    ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE–3, THANE VERSUS THE THANE BHARAT SAHAKARI BANK LTD.

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22901 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=84050&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  16. ITAT Mumbai · 21 Jul 2020
    In the case in hand a show-cause notice for cancellation of lease was issued on 25.8.2013 and ultimately lease of plot was cancelled vide order dated 31.12.2015, therefore, we find force in the submission of assessee that after issuance of show-cause notice for cancellation of lease on which building was developed, the assessee was not entitled to let out occupied/constructed portion.

    AKSHAR COMMERCIAL COMPLEX LTD. (ERSTWHILE M/S. AKSHAR COMMERCIAL COMPLEX PVT. LTD.) VERSUS DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 15 (1) (1) , MUMBAI

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22900 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=84051&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  17. ITAT Mumbai · 21 Jul 2020
    The income tax return filed by the assessee, which was available at the time of recording the reasons for reopening the assessment, did not show the status of non-resident. The recording of reasons cannot thus be faulted. Whatever claim is made subsequently is required to be dealt with in the subsequent proceeding but it will not vitiate the validity of reasons recorded for reopening the assessment.

    RENU T THARANI VERSUS DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION CIRCLE 4 (2) (1) , MUMBAI

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22899 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=84057&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  18. ITAT Mumbai · 20 Jul 2020
    On the principle of the Noscitur a sociis, the asset transferred under slump sale would fall under the sweep of this section, i.e., 5th proviso to Section 32(1), despite the word slump sale not used therein specifically.

    ITO Vs M / s. Archroma India Pvt. Ltd.

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22897 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 32

  19. ITAT Mumbai · 20 Jul 2020
    On receipt of reply alongwith 34 documents from M/s. Utkal Export, neither the AO or the CIT(A) show caused the assessee by way of written notice or note sheet entry and proceeded to make addition u/s.69A by treating the impugned amount of three bills and processing charges paid to the assessee in cash. This act of the revenue authorities is clearly contrary to the principles of natural justice as on receipt of reply from M/s. Utkal Export before making addition, the assessee should have been show caused informing him regarding reply received from M/s. Utkal Export and asking the assessee to reconcile the same.

    ODISHA AQUA TRADERS & MARINE EXPORTERS PVT LTD. VERSUS ACIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1 (2) , BHUBANESWAR.

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22893 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=84038&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  20. ITAT Mumbai · 20 Jul 2020
    The AMP expenditure incurred by the assessee in India cannot come within the purview of the international transaction. Hence, the Transfer Pricing Officer has no jurisdiction to determine the arm's length price of AMP expenditure.

    JT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE–14 (1) (2) , MUMBAI VERSUS GENERAL MILLS INDIA PVT. LTD.

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22892 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=84040&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.


An unhandled error has occurred. Reload ×

Rejoining the server...

Rejoin failed... trying again in seconds.

Failed to rejoin.
Please retry or reload the page.

The session has been paused by the server.

Failed to resume the session.
Please retry or reload the page.