-
As per material placed on record, we found that the claim is made on account of misappropriation of funds by the ex-director of the company. The said director misused his authority while holding the position and incurred various expenses from the company's funds which were of personal in nature.
CENTRUM BROKING LTD. VERSUS D.C.I.T., 4 (1) (1) MUMBAI.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20325 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=78739&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
In absence of finding that the transaction was sham, the TPO can not treat the transaction as a loan and charge interest thereon on notional basis.
Voltas Limited Vs DCIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20316 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
By investing huge sum the assessee has obtained a valuable business / commercial right to operate the project facility and collect toll charges. Right acquired by the assessee for operating the project facility and collecting toll charges is an intangible asset.
Essel Sagar Damoh Toll Roads Ltd Vs Asstt. Commissioner of Income-tax (Cir)
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20315 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
In the instant case as recorded by the AO when a prospective buyer approaches the assessee for booking the flat, allotment letter is issued to the buyer on receipt of the advance money. The appellant filed a written submission dated 26.03.2015 before the AO stating that the degree of work completed and certified by architect till 31.03.2009 is 73% and the assessee-company has recognized the revenue by applying 73% to the value of agreements executed till 31.03.2009.
M/S SHANKALA REALTORS PVT. LTD. VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER-8 (2) (1), 7 (2) (3) , ADDL. CIT-7 (2), MUMBAI.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20312 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=78694&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
HSCI had paid a referral fee to assessee for introducing ABB to HSCI. Briefly, ABB Switzerland wanted to increase its equity stake in ABB Ltd. India through a voluntary offer and hence needed the services of a merchant banker in India. As per Section 9 of the Act, income earned by a non-resident is taxable in India if, inter-alia, the non-resident has a business connection in India and the income arises through or from the business connection; or it is in the nature of royalty or ‘Fees for Technical Services’.
HSBC BANK PLC C/O SRBC & ASSOCIATES LLP VERSUS DCIT (IT) -2 (2) (2) , MUMBAI
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20300 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=78629&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
S. 68 Bogus Share Capital: As the share applicant companies were controlled by an infamous accommodation entry provider, it was incumbent on the part of the authorities to have carried out an in-depth verification of the genuineness of the transaction of receipt of share application money by the assessee from the said parties. However, the authorities have not done even the bare minimum for verifying the genuineness of the transaction. Such a casual approach cannot be subscribed on our part (NRA Iron & Steel 412 ITR 161 (SC) followed)
ITO vs. Citymaker Builder Pvt. Ltd
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20294 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 68
-
S. 10(38)/ 68: Bogus LTCG from penny stocks: The fact that a scam has taken place in some penny stocks does not mean that all transactions in penny stocks can be regarded as bogus. In deciding whether the claim is genuine or not, the authorities have to be guided by the legal evidence and not on general observations based on statements, probabilities, human behavior, modus operandi etc. The AO has to show with evidence the chain of events and live link of the assessee's involvement in the scam including that he paid cash and in return received exempt LTCG gains (Sanjay Bimalchand Jain 89 TM 196 (Bom) distinguished)
Vijayrattan Balkrishan Mittal vs. DCIT (ITAT Mumbai)
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20286 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Sections 10(38), 68
-
It is well-settled that the cardinal rule of interpretation is that the statute must be construed according to its plain language and neither should anything be added nor subtracted therefrom unless there are adequate grounds to justify the inference that the Legislature clearly so intended.
L & T Hochtief Seabird Joint Venture Vs Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20269 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 40(ba)
-
The occasion to seek invocation of such an administrative indulgence comes after the AO declines to exercise his powers of granting stay u/s. 220(6), and, perhaps for this reason, it is somewhat inappropriately described as an order u/s. 220(6).
Sale Mohd Padmasee & Co Vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20261 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
The capital gains arising to Merrill Lynch Capital Market Espana SA SV on sale of shares in Indian real estate companies during AY 2013-14, are not taxable in India under Article 14(6) of the India-Spain DTAA and rejected revenue' s stand that the gains were covered by Article 14(4) and hence taxable in source jurisdiction i.e. India.
JCIT vs. Merrill Lynch Capital Market Espana SA SV
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20252 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
The method of valuation i.e. NAV method or Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) method to determine the FMV has to be adopted at assessee's option and the AO cannot change the method of valuation opted by the assessee, remits matter for re-calculation of FMV.
Narang Access Pvt. Ltd Vs The DCIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20249 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 56(2)(viib)
-
Transfer of shares of Dish TV as 'gift' by assessee to its group company pursuant to consolidation of onshore media assets, not a colourable device and CIT's revisionary order u/s 263 for AY 2014-15 is quashed.
Direct Media Distribution Ventures Pvt Ltd Vs Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20246 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Section 143(2) states that where a return has been furnished u/s 139, the AO, if he considers it necessary or expedient to ensure that the assessee has not understated the income or has not under paid the tax in any manner, shall serve on the assessee a notice requiring him, on a date to be specified therein, either to attend the office of the AO or to produce, or cause to be produced before the AO any evidence on which the assessee may rely in support of the return.
BHAVESH PRAVINCHANDRA SHETH VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- 12 (2), MUMBAI
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20234 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=78311&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Due to peculiar nature of the product and constant mixing and re-mixing of diamonds obtained from AEs and non-AEs, it would not be feasible to maintain records to determine segmental profitability to work out internal TNMM. The undisputed position that emerges is that the assessee has carried out certain international transactions during the year with its AE and benchmarked the same using TNMM method in its Transfer Pricing Study which has been accepted by Ld. TPO.
DCIT-5 (2) (1), MUMBAI VERSUS M/S. K. GIRDHARILAL INTERNATIONAL LTD.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20233 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=78315&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
S. 56(2)(viib)/ Rule 11UA: The assessee has the option to determine the fair market value of shares either under the DCF method or the NAV method. The assessee's choice is binding on the AO. While the AO can scrutinize the working, he cannot discard the assessee's method and substitute another method (Vodafone M-Pesa Ltd vs. PCIT [2018] 92 taxmann.com 73 (Bom) referred)
Narang Access Pvt. Ltd vs. DCIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20226 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 56(2)(viib)
-
S. 48 Capital Gains: The payment towards discharge of outstanding loan liability out of the sale proceeds of mortgaged property is a mere application of income and not a diversion of sale proceeds by overriding title. The assessee cannot claim such application as deduction for the purpose of computing Capital Gain in terms of s. 48 of the Act. The legal position prevailing prior to SARFAESI Act is also germane even after the enactment of SARFAESI Act
Perfect Thread Mills Ltd vs. DCIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20225 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 48
-
Impugned assessment order has been passed without authority of law in as much as Revenue has not been able to demonstrate that the Additional Commissioner of Income tax who had passed the assessment order had valid authority to perform and exercise the powers and functions of an Assessing Officer of the assessee and to pass the impugned assessment order.
TATA CHEMICALS LIMITED (AFTER MERGER OF SABRAS INVESTMENT & TRADING CO. LTD.) 24 VERSUS THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SPECIAL RANGE-1, MUMBAI
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20224 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=78238&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The SARFAESI Act merely provides a recovery mechanism and nothing else.
Perfect Thread Mills Ltd Vs DCIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20217 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
None of the services provided involved any element of imparting of knowhow nor was there a transfer of any knowledge, skill or experience to fall within the ambit of royalty.
Van Oord Dredging and Marine Vs Dy.CIT (International Taxation)
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20216 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Being a chairman in a company does not amount to holding a substantial interest therein in terms of the clear mandate of Explanation 3 to section 13 of the Act.
J.R.D. Tata Trust Vs The ITO
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20203 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Sections 11, 13
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.