-
Though the CBDT Circular No. 1/2005 was in the context of section 10B, the ratio of the circular equally applies to Section 10A.
THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2 (1) VERSUS ZENTEST LABS
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26870 (ITAT-PUNE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=90575&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Receipt of a fixed amount, which may be more or less than the actual outgo, cannot be designated as reimbursement.
BYK Asia Pacific Pte. Limited Vs ACIT (IT)
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26440 (ITAT-PUNE) · Section 195
-
Expenses incurred by the assessee in foreign exchange should be reduced from both the export turnover as well as total turnover while computing deduction u/ss.10A/10AA.
Barclays Shared Services Private Limited Vs ACIT
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26326 (ITAT-PUNE) · Sections 10A, 10AA
-
Deduction cannot be denied to the assessee in view of the Explanation 1 inserted to section 35(1)(ii) by Finance Act, 2006 with retrospective effect from April 01, 2006.
MRC Transolutions Pvt. Ltd Vs ACIT
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26175 (ITAT-PUNE)
-
Even though the ld. CIT was rightfully entitled to take recourse to the Explanation 2.,t is palpable that none of the four clauses of the Explanation 2 applies to the case under consideration. The sequitur is that the revisionary power, even under the enlarged scope of the Explanation 2, was not legally exercisable.
Nalco Company,USA Nalco Water India limited Vs CIT
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26141 (ITAT-PUNE)
-
As the scope of Royalty came to be expanded after the close of the financial year, the same could not have triggered disallowance u/s.40(a)(ia).
Barclays Technology Centre India Pvt. Ltd Vs DCIT
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26074 (ITAT-PUNE) · Section 40(a)(ia)
-
Acquainting someone in a formal manner with techniques to boost sales does not stand at par with rendering marketing services. Simply equipping or enabling the others for doing an activity is a step anterior to rendition of such services.
M/s. Sandvik AB Vs DCIT (IT)
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26009 (ITAT-PUNE)
-
If title of an immovable property stands in the name of two persons, it evidences both as co-owners title of the immovable property which is decisive of ownership and not the understanding outside the records which both the parties may have entered into.
Perviz Sarosh Batliwala Vs ACIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24722 (ITAT-PUNE)
-
In the present case the assets were acquired in India, therefore, the conditions of making actual repayment of foreign currency loan as stipulated under Sec.43A is not a condition for making necessary adjustment in the actual cost of the asset, thus general principles of law would be applicable.
Aesseal India Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24664 (ITAT-PUNE)
-
In the present case the source & destination (i.e. investment) are business income/assets, thus as a fortiori, such an income will be considered as Business income covered under Chapter IV-D of the Act forming part of book-profit for the purposes of allowing remuneration to partners.
Sagar Samrat Vs ACIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24546 (ITAT-PUNE) · Sections 69, 69A
-
The requirement of formal issue of completion certificate from local authority within the time period is not mandatory in nature and if the project is found to be completed within the time period on evidence, the claim of the assessee for deduction u/s 80IB cannot be denied.
ACIT Vs Kaiser Jamil Khan
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24265 (ITAT-PUNE) · Section 80IB(10)
-
The superior courts have held the Income Tax Act to be a welfare legislation, meaning thereby that the tax-payer practical circumstances have to be looked into by the quasi-judicial authority while undertaking assessment proceedings and penal proceedings, thus considering the totality of the facts AO is directed to delete the penalty so levied.
ACIT Vs M/s Gepach International
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24262 (ITAT-PUNE)
-
CIT(A) had rightfully allowed deduction on account of penal interest paid to RBI for non-maintenance of SLR and CRR including especially the provision made for the same to the extent of Rs.6,13,89,000/-.
The Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax Vs The Beed District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24211 (ITAT-PUNE)
-
Merely having surplus in one year does not change the character of the trust to a business or profit-making entity which was otherwise a charitable trust advancing work of general public utility and certainly not hit by the first proviso to Section 2 (15) of the Act.
Credai- Pune Metro Vs The Income Tax Officer
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 23169 (ITAT-PUNE) · Section 11
-
When we peruse the order of assessment, we find there is no discussion at all as rightly pointed out by the Ld. DR on this very fact regarding the difference in figures in the original return and corrected computation.
HINDUMAL BALMUKUND INVESTMENT CO. PVT. LTD. VERSUS THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, PUNE.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22996 (ITAT-PUNE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=84217&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The essence of the matter is to examine as to whether a particular expenditure/loss is deductible and not whether the same is recorded in the books of account. If a particular amount is deductible as per law, the same has to be allowed as deduction irrespective of the fact that it was not recorded in the books of account. It is further noticed that the assessee did not record such diminution of value of securities to the extent of ₹ 2.65 crores in its books of account so as to satisfy the RBI norms, which provide for valuing the securities as such without any diminution in their value at the year end.
M/S. VISHWAS CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. VERSUS DCIT, CIRCLE-1, NASHIK
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22907 (ITAT-PUNE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=84068&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The essence of the matter was to examine whether a particular expenditure was deductible and not whether the same was recorded in the books of account. If a particular amount was deductible as per law, the same had to be allowed as deduction irrespective of the fact that it was not recorded in the books of account.
M/s. Vishwas Co-operative Bank Ltd., Vs DCIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22898 (ITAT-PUNE)
-
Assessee paid the above sum towards VRS of certain employees of Calcutta unit. It is noticed that similar issue came up for consideration before the Tribunal in assessee‟s own case for the immediately succeeding assessment year. Vide order The Tribunal has decided it in favour of the assessee.
FOSECO INDIA LIMITED VERSUS DCIT, CIRCLE – 1 (2) , PUNE
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22821 (ITAT-PUNE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83915&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Miscellaneous receipts can be sub-grouped into three lots i.e. (i) the receipts covered by the earlier Tribunal's order, (ii) the receipts, assessee never claimed deduction, and, (iii) the business connected receipts or otherwise. So far as sub-group one is concerned, we find the receipts is covered by the order of the Tribunal in the assessee's own case for the assessment year 2008-09.
LAXMI CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES PVT. LTD. VERSUS ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLHAPUR AND (VICE-VERSA) AND ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLHAPUR VERSUS VIJAYKUMAR RAJARAM SHAH
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22818 (ITAT-PUNE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83897&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Finding recorded by the Ld. CIT(Exemption) that the registration cannot be granted for the assessee as it is involved in imparting the training to the employees of the state govt, is incorrect and contrary to the law. For this purposes, we may rely upon the decision of CIT Vs. Andhra Pradesh Police Welfare Society and Water and land Management Training Research Institute and DIT Vs. National Safely Counsel.
VIBHAGIYA PRASHASKIYA PRASHIKSHAN SANSTHA, C/O. DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER OFFICE CAMPUS VERSUS THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) PUNE.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22575 (ITAT-PUNE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83408&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.