-
ITAT - Computation of short term capital gains on sale of various office premises at WDV taken as per The Companies Act as against Income Tax Act is a bonafide computational error - Same could not be termed as furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income which justifies imposition of penalty u/s 271(1)(c).
CONCRETE IDEAS REAL TORS PVT. LTD. VERSUS ITO-12 (1) (4), MUMBAI
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16869 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=71083&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Property tax and other payment made to BMC could not be said to have been incurred wholly and exclusively in connection with the transfer of the property in terms of Section 48.
SMT. MUNISHA D. AHUJA VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CIRCLE-17 (2) MUMBAI.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16868 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=71084&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Finance Act, 2017 amendment to Sec. 23(5), is effective only from A.Y.2018-19 onwards and cannot be applied retrospectively. For AY 2012-13 no deemed rental income in hands of builder in respect of unsold flats.
Saranga Estates Pvt. Ltd Vs Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16863 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 23
-
S. 50C Capital Gains: The adoption of stamp valuation as the sale consideration is not justified in absence of any evidence that the sale consideration was more than the value shown in the agreement. The AO has not brought on record that the property under sale was not was under various encumbrances and the assessee was having the absolute marketable title of the said property (All judgements considered)
Sir Mohd. Yusuf Trust vs. ACIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16847 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 50C
-
The insinuation of the Dept that ITAT passes order in a state of oblivion displays a totally irresponsible and cavalier approach on the cusp of contempt and deserving exemplary cost to purge the same. Referring in a deriding manner that the ITAT started with the grounds of appeal, displays the naivette of revenue authority purporting to be critical examiner of ITAT verdict, which is uncalled for. I express deep anguish at this approach of the department and hope that revenue will disband this cavalier and naïve approach while insinuating about the functioning of the ITAT without verifying their record
ITO vs. Rayoman Carriers Pvt. Ltd
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16846 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
S. 92C Transfer Pricing: It is mandatory for the AO to determine the arm's length price (ALP) of the international transactions by following one of the prescribed methods. He is not entitled to follow any other method or to resort to estimation. The failure to follow one of the prescribed methods makes the entire transfer pricing adjustment unsustainable in law. The legal infirmity cannot be cured by restoring the issue to the TPO. The TPO cannot be allowed another innings to rectify the mistake
CLSA India Private Limited vs. DCIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16845 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 92C
-
ITAT - Tax Planning - The transactions cannot be termed as sham just because there is lower outflow of taxes.
Asianet TV Holdings Pvt. Ltd Vs ACIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16748 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
ITAT - After disposal of the appeal by the Tribunal if the department comes with fresh evidence, certainly it cannot be entertained, much less by taking recourse of Section 254(2).
Acme Dwellers Pvt. Ltd Vs Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16645 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
ITAT - Gain earned as acquired from IPO is to be assessed as Business Income since investments were made by the assessee as a trader and not as an investor.
NIRPAN SECURITIES PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4 (2) (1), MUMBAI
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16630 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=69033&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - There is no restriction placed in section 54 that exemption is allowable only in respect of sale of one residential house.
Bipin N. Sagar Vs ACIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16627 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 54
-
ITAT - Where assessee firm's partners held shares in closely held company, on their own account and not on behalf of the firm, assessee firm is neither registered not beneficial shareholder to attract provisions of Sec 2(22)(e)
Golani Brothers Vs DCIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16624 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
ITAT - Rental income from Operating Family Entertainment Center cum Mall and Maintenance Charges is taxable as PGBP.
ASST. CIT-9 (2) (2) , MUMBAI VERSUS M/S. E-CITY PROJECTS CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16606 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=70226&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Except for stating that there was business exigency and the loan taken was for business purpose, no cogent evidence has been produced. Penalty levied u/s. 271D confirmed.
M/S. ELECTROPLAST ENGINEERS VERSUS JCIT-24 (3), MUMBAI
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16605 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=70227&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - To make addition u/s 68 merely, doubting or pointing out some discrepancy cannot be made the foundation for discarding the genuineness of the deposit or share money.
ITO-13 (3) (4), MUMBAI VERSUS M/S TRISHUL TRADERS PVT. LTD.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16594 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=69451&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Making slabs for sponsorship fee and specifying the types of service against it are certainly for commercial gains with predominant objective to make profit - Assessee does not fall within the meaning of education as included in the definition of charitable purpose under Section 2(15) - No Exemption u/s 11.
THE INDUS ENTREPRENEURS VERSUS DY. CIT (EXEMPTIONS) -1 (2) PIRAMAL CHAMBERS, LALBAUG, PAREL, MUMBAI
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16587 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=70155&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
S. 251(1)(a): The CIT(A) has no jurisdiction to permit an assessee to withdraw an appeal and to dismiss it in limine. Notwithstanding the request seeking withdrawal of the appeal, the CIT(A) is obliged and duty bound under the Act to decide the appeal on merits
M/s. Deekay Gears vs. ACIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16574 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 251(1)(a)
-
S. 147 Reopening for taxing Bogus share capital: Even in a s. 143(1) intimation, the AO is not entitled to reopen on the ground that the assessee has received "huge share premium" which was not "examined" by the AO. The AO cannot reopen in the absence of tangible material that shows income has escaped assessment
DCIT vs. Kargwal Products P. Ltd
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16563 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 147, 143(1)
-
ITAT - If there was a mistake in the order of the AO, the only course of action available to the AO was to take an action u/s 154 but not to initiate the proceedings for passing a second order. The AO having once passed an order giving effect to the order of ITAT, becomes functus officio.
Late Shri Harshad S. Mehta Vs D y. Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16556 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
ITAT - FTS under India-France DTAA has to be given a restrictive meaning similar to that of the expression "FTS” appearing in the India-UK DTAA.
Entertainment Network (India) Ltd Vs Joint Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16452 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
ITAT - Search u/s 132 to be valid, the warrant and notice should be issued in the name of the successor only, however in the present case, had been issued in the name of a non-existent entity which could not be said to be mere clerical mistake.
M/S. NAHAR ENTERPRISES VERSUS DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- (OSD- I) AND DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL CIRCLE 4 (4) , MUMBAI VERSUS M/S. NAHAR ENTERPRISES
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16442 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=69572&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.