-
ITAT - Addition to additional income offered during the survey due to threat, undue influence or coercion not justified. Department directed to refund the taxes.
Shri Pandoo P. Naig, Prakash B. Bandarkar, Pravin B. Bandarkar Versus ACIT, CC-32, Mumbai Vice-Versa
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11180 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=51370&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - There is no requirement that the windmill should be used in any manufacturing activity therefore assessee is entitled to the claim of additional depreciation 31(1)(iia).
Ultramarine and Pigments Limited Versus ACIT Range-7 (3), Mumbai
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11166 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=51446&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Vacancy allowance u/s 23(1)(c) is available only when property actually is let out. Notion of ‘intent to let out’ or ‘proposed to be let’, etc., cannot be imported into the provision, which seeks to tax a notional sum
Sharan Hospitality Private Limited vs. DCIT
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11140 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section. 23(1)(c)
-
ITAT - Once the commission is accepted to have been paid, there is no logic in disallowing such expenditure on the ground of being excessive. It is for the assessee to determine the way in which it has to carry on its business.
Anand Enterprises Versus Jt. CIT 18 (2), Mumbai
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11139 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=51387&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Where addition was made on cessation of liability (Amount of advance received for sale of property), the amount of advance received will have to be be reduced from the cost of acquisition of asset while computing capital gains.
ITO, 3 (1) (4), Mumbai Versus M/s Fiesta Properties Pvt Ltd
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11138 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=51250&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Expenses cannot be considered to be incurred wholly and exclusive for the purpose of the business as the same were incurred to create good relations with the doctors in lieu of expected favours from doctors for recommending to patients the pharmaceutical products.
The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 6 (3), Mumbai Versus Liva Healthcare Limited And Vice-Versa
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11134 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=51251&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Transfer Pricing: The assessee is obliged to carry out a bench-marking exercise with independent comparables and prove that its transactions with AEs are at arms length. Mere fact that the transaction is approved by the RBI and Govt is not sufficient
Sara Lee TTK Ltd vs. DCIT
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11133 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Entire law on whether consideration for alienation of rights under a "Call Option agreement" for shares is taxable as "capital gains" or as "income from other sources" in the context of the India-Singapore DTAA explained
Praful Chandaria vs. ADIT
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11132 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
S. 153A: Even in a case where only a s. 143(1) assessment is made, additions cannot be made without the backing of incriminating material if the s. 143(1) assessment has not abated
Anil Mahavir Gupta vs. ACIT
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11128 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 153A
-
ITAT - Section 88E of the Act does not envisage any distinction between total income computable under the normal provisions of the Act and that computable under Section 115JB so far as it relates to the granting of rebate against the amount of income-tax payable.
The ACIT 2 (1), Mumbai Versus Chokhani Securities Ltd.
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11110 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=51330&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Not only profits but also losses from the business have to be taken into consideration while computing deduction u/s 10B .
DCIT-10 (3) (2), Mumbai Versus M/s Phoenix Mecano (I) Pvt. Ltd.
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11070 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=51223&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - The expression used in the statement given u/s 132(4) cannot be taken as determinative factor for deciding the character of the purchase of shares.
Shri Madan I. Jain Versus DCIT, Circle 4 (1) Inv. Mumbai
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11057 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=51067&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
S. 37(1): Expenditure incurred by a director in engaging lawyers to defend himself against cases filed for violation of the law by the Company of which he is a director is not personal expenditure but is allowable as business expenditure
Nimesh N. Kampani vs. ACIT
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11040 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section. 37(1)
-
Compensation received by flat owner from builder for hardship caused due to redevelopment of the building is a non-taxable receipt and has to be reduced from the cost of the flat. Amount received from builder to meet rental costs during the redevelopment is also not taxable as income
Jitendra Kumar Soneja vs. ITO
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11000 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Capital Gains: Mere fact that the assessee is shown as a co-owner of the property does not mean that the capital gains are partly assessable in her hands if the facts show that the other co-owner bought the property from his own funds and showed it as his sole property in the balance sheet
ITO vs. Dr. Vandana Bhulchandani
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10999 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
ITAT - Service tax deposited by the customers as a part of assessee’s royalty income not taxable.
Meridien SA vs. DDIT
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10986 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
ITAT - No Disallowance of loan processing charges and pre-payment charges paid to the bank. So long as the expenses incurred by the assessee are genuine and not part of any colorable device to make tax evasion, then such expenses should be allowed.
Peepul Tree Properties P. Ltd. Versus Asst. CIT 5 (1) , Mumbai
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10917 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=50497&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Since SIES has not specifically stated that the amount received from the assessee was returned back as per the modus operandi, it cannot be held conclusively that either no donation was paid by the assessee to SIES or the amount paid by the assessee was returned by SIES. Deduction u/s 80G allowed.
M/s. Logus Realty Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Addl. CIT Range 8 (2) , Mumbai.
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10914 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=50919&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Even though assessee was shown as the co-owner of the property, source of funds for investment in purchase of the property was by assessee’s husband. The entire STCG arising on sale of the property is to be assessed in the hands of assessee’s husband and not in assessee’s hands.
ITO Vs. Dr. Vandana Bhulchandani
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10865 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
ITAT - Amount remitted by an Indian subsidiary to its 100% Mauritian holding company under share buy-back scheme is not taxable in India. No TDS u/s Sec 195.
Korn Ferry International Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT (OSD)
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10860 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.