-
S. 271(1)(c): Penalty cannot be levied if the omission to offer income, and the wrong claim of deduction, was by oversight and the auditors did not point it out. Also, the failure of the AO to specify the limb under which penalty u/s 271(1)(c) is imposed is a fatal error
Wadhwa Estate & Developers India Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12363 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section. 271(1)(c)
-
S. 14A & Rule 8D: Disallowance under Rule 8D is not compulsory or mandatory. S. 14A(2) & Rule 8D cannot be invoked unless the AO examines the accounts and records the finding why the assessee's claim/ computation is not proper (entire law discussed and important judgements referred)
Shapoorji Pallonji & Co. Ltd. vs. DCIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12362 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section. 14A
-
ITAT - ‘Retainership fees’ payment under the service contract is ‘salary’ and TDS u/s 192 applicable.
Red Chillies Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12316 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Sections. 192, 194J
-
ITAT - No addition u/s 41 where the matter is in dispute and sub-judice, therefore assessee cannot be expected to get a confirmation from the creditor.
ITO 2 (1) (1) Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai Versus ALFA Distilleries Pvt. Ltd.
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12313 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54837&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - No TDS u/s 194I on compensation paid for the use of the building / premises / place of the members for construction activities.
M/s Shanish Construction Pvt Ltd Versus Income Tax Officer, 8 (3) (1), Mumbai
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12298 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54814&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Capital gains: While s. 2(42A) uses the term "held", the other provisions use the terms "acquired", "purchased" and "owner". Accordingly, for considering whether an asset is a "long-term capital asset", the period of holding must be computed on a de facto basis. The letter of allottment, even though not "ownership", must be taken as the date of holding the asset
Anita D Kanjani vs. ACIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12293 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
ITAT - Merely because the assessee is not maintaining books of accounts, he cannot get rid of offering the income earned by him during the year. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) valid for non disclosure of income earned by way of Director Sitting Fee.
Shri Mahesh M. Gandhi, Mumbai Versus Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax – 20 (2), Mumbai
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12292 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54796&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - AO does not have powers to charge fees under section 234E by way of intimation issued u/s 200A in respect of defaults before 01.06.2015 and consequently allow the ground of appeal raised by the assessee.
M/s. Sprigtime Clubs and Hospitality Services Pvt. Ltd. Versus Assessing Officer, TDS Ward, Kalyan (W)
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12290 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54800&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - There is no justification of allowing expenses against the house property income other than that provided as deduction under the scheme of computation of house property income.
Akola Trading Company P. Ltd Versus ITO WD 2 (1) (1), Mumbai
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12288 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54803&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Expenditure incurred by the assessee even voluntary and without any legal obligation has to be allowed as it was incurred for preserving the reputation of its business..
Kotak Securities Limited Versus Addl. CIT, Mumbai
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12257 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54774&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - When actual rent received is more than the fair rent the actual rent would be the annual value and therefore the notional interest would not form part of actual rent received or receivable u/s 23(1)(b).
DCIT 29 (1), Mumbai Versus Dinesh M Shah Prop. M/s Mehula Enterprises
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12247 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54740&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Director fees /capital gains were not ‘meager’ amounts which can be claimed to have skipped assessee’s attention while filing return of income when the assessee was deriving income mainly from salaries. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) valid.
Shri Mahesh M. Gandhi vs. ACIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12245 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section. 271(1)(c)
-
ITAT - Loan waiver is neither taxable under the normal provisions of the IT Act, nor can be recorded as operational profit in the P&L account as per Companies Act and relevant Accounting Standards. Not 'book-profit' under MAT.
JSW Steel Limited vs. ACIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12244 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
ITAT - Special discount though not claimed by filing revised return and claimed by way of a letter during the course of assessment proceedings, still the claim of the assessee is to be allowed.
M/s Truetzschler India Pvt. Ltd (Formerly Known as Trumac Engineering Co. P. Ltd.) Versus Asst. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle 2 (3), Mumbai
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12232 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54685&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Unexplained cash deposited in bank - Penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) cannot be sustained as the assessee had came forward with an explanation which is a reasonable and bonafide explanation complying with the mandate of Section 271(1)(c) read with explanation 1.
Murli Dodeja Versus Income Tax Officer Ward 21 (3) (3), Mumbai
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12229 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54691&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - No addition for unaccounted cash for the purchase of property as in the absence of any other corroborative evidence to establish a direct nexus, it cannot be said that the notings in the loose paper are genuine.
ITO (IT) 2 (1) Mumbai Versus Ashok Bastimal Siroya, Lalita Ashok Siroya
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12228 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54693&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Additional depreciation on diagnostic/service equipments allowed.
M/s Abbott Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Asst. Commissioner of Income-Tax – Range 2 (1), Mumbai
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12225 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54699&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Mere mistake in the language in the notice for non-striking off of ‘inaccurate particular’ or marking on ‘concealment of income’ portion cannot by itself invalidate the notice u/s 274. Mere not striking off specific limb cannot by itself invalidate notice issued u/s 274.
M/s Trishul Enterprises Versus ACIT, Circle- (1), Thane
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12224 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54670&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Consultancy charges incurred on designing and implementation of TDS and other systems is revenue expenditure.
Bayer CropScience Limited Versus Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax 15 (1) (2), Mumbai
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12222 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54675&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - As assessee was able to prove conclusively that the CCPS issued by it to Biometrix is directly financed by ICICI Bank, Singapore, therefore AO made addition of unexplained cash credit without any basis.
Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3 (3) (1), Mumbai Versus M/s Reliance Utilities P Ltd., and M/s Reliance Ports and Terminals Ltd.
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12220 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54669&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.