-
S. 23 House Property Income: Common Area Maintenance Charges and non-occupancy charges paid by the assessee to the Society are deductible from the rent while computing the 'Annual Letting Value' u/s 22
DCIT vs. Yogen D. Sanghvi
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 14068 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Sections 22, 23
-
S. 54: Acquisition of new flat in an apartment under construction should be considered as a case of “Construction” and not “Purchase”. The date of commencement of construction is not relevant for purpose of s. 54. The fact that the construction may have commenced prior to the date of transfer of the old asset is irrelevant. If the construction is completed within 3 years from the date of transfer, the exemption is available
Mustansir I Tehsildar vs. ITO
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 14043 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 54
-
Taxability of Gifts u/s 56(2)(vi): A receipt cannot be taxed u/s 56(2)(vi) merely on conjecture or surmises. The AO has to prove beyond doubt that a particular receipt is taxable as income. Merely because the person who paid the amount does not initiate any action for recovery of money is not sufficient for making addition
Nilesh Janardan Thakur vs. ITO
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13942 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section. 56(2)(vi)
-
Undisclosed income found in search: Law on whether statement obtained u/s 132(4) admitting earning of undisclosed income, which is allegedly retracted, can be used for making assessment explained in the light of P.V. Kalyanasundaram 294 ITR 49 (SC), S. Kadar Khan 352 ITR 480 (SC) and CBDT’s Circular
DCIT. vs. Studio Aethletic Health & Hospitality Pvt. Ltd.
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13941 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
S. 14A/ Rule 8D: Imp principles law down reg (i) disallowance for single segment companies being investors and dealers in shares and having to incur all business expenses under normal circumstances, (ii) strategic investments, (iii) securities held as stock-in-trade, (iv) inclusion of securities which have not yielded any exempt income and (v) whether diminution in value of securities constitutes "expenditure" for disallowance
ACIT. vs. Af-taab Investment Company Limited
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13940 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section. 14A
-
S. 68 Bogus share capital: In the case of credit as share capital by corporate entity, whose existence is shown by its registration with Registrar of companies and its filing of tax returns, adverse conclusion is not justified merely because its directors are not produced personally before the AO by the assessee. The AO has to demonstrate with specific evidence that the assessee has in reality obtained accommodation entries by showing cash deposits linked to the investors
ITO. Vs. Shreedham Construction Pvt. Ltd.
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13931 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section. 68
-
S. 45/ 48: The scheme of the Act is to assess real income and not hypothetical income. The word "accrue" in "full value of consideration received or accruing" in s. 45 means that the assessee has a legally enforceable right to receive the sum. An amount which is payable only on fulfillment of conditions does not create an enforceable right and has to be excluded while computing capital gains
Late Shri Gordhandas S. Garodia vs. DCIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13904 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Sections. 45, 48
-
Withdrawal of appeal: The Petitioner/ Plaintiff is the ‘dominus litis’ and it is open to him to pursue or abandon his case. Withdrawal cannot be denied except when the person making the prayer has obtained some advantage/ benefit which he seeks to retain
M/s Sainath Enterprises vs. ACIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13883 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
ITAT - Nine month lease rental receipt by way of forfeiture of security deposit cannot be given any different treatment then the lease rental receipt which qualify for deduction u/s. 80IAB.
Quadron Business Part Ltd. Vs. Dy. CIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13820 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section. 80IAB
-
ITAT - In view of the benefit conferred by Article 6 of India-Kenya DTAA, rental income earned by a bank from house property at Kenya is not taxable in India. Any notification or circular cannot alter the nature of income that has been specifically included in DTAAs.
Bank of India Vs. CIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13817 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
ITAT - Working directors were well qualified and looked after general administration, finance apart from research activity, production and marketing. Deduction allowable for commission (paid within company law limit) to director-cum-shareholder.
S.H. Kelkar & Co. Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13808 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
ITAT - Business Centre Service charges - The appellant is held to be “deemed owner” of the property in question by virtue of Section 27(iiib) of the Act.
Income Tax Officer 8 (2) (3), Mumbai Versus Niyman Mall Management Co. Pvt. Ltd. And Vice-Versa
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13790 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=59784&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Re-opening not valid as supply of an extract of the ‘reasons to believe’ would not suffice the statutory obligation of making available the reasons to the assessee.
Ashik Ali Husain Ali Unwala Vs. ITO
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13783 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
ITAT - Amount received for transfer of customers and business leads is to be taxed as 'business receipts' and not as 'slump sale' u/s. 50B.
L & T Finance Ltd. Vs. DCIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13780 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
ITAT - Where clear work demarcation exists, Consortium not taxable as AOP.
Vitkovice Machinery AS. DCIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13779 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
S. 68: In the absence of any direct evidence demonstrating that the assessee received cash payment, no addition can be made merely on presumption and surmises and on estimate basis. For making the addition on account of cash component, it is the duty of the AO to bring on record corroborative evidence to establish the fact that the entries made in the seized document were correct
ACIT. vs. Katrina (Kaif) Rosemary Turcotte
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13778 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section. 68
-
Bogus capital gains from penny stocks: If the DMAT account and contract note show details of the share transactions and the AO has not proved the transactions to be bogus, the capital gains earned on the said transactions cannot be treated as unaccounted income u/s 68. The fact that the broker was tainted and violated SEBI regulations would not make assessee’s transactions bogus
ITO. vs. Arvind Kumar Jain HUF
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13777 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
ITAT - Benefit of Article 8 of the India–Germany DTAA available in respect of the revenue earned from the feeder vessels obtained on slot hire arrangements.
Hapag –Lloyd AG Versus DCIT (IT), 2 (2) (2), Mumbai
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13774 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=59725&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - No addition u/s 40A(2)(b) in respect of license fee, programme amortization-payment, as AO has failed to substantiate the allegation that assessee has extended unreasonable favour to its sister concern.
The ACIT-10 (3) (1), Mumbai Versus M/s Neo Sports Broadcast Pvt. Ltd.
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13773 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=59722&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Since company was not vested with the legal ownership of the vehicle, but then, it remained the beneficial owner of the same, entitled towards the claim of depreciation.
Pan Oleo Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax 10 (3) (2), Mumbai
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13772 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=59716&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.