-
If a unit does not qualify for deduction u/s 35AD but fulfills the criteria for being a specified business u/s 35AD(8)(c), then the loss of any specified business can be set-off against the profits of unit eligible for deduction u/s 35AD.
Sarovar Hotels Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 24973 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 35AD
-
Since assessee did not know the payee or liability, provisions of Sec. 40(a)(ia) do no apply.
DCIT Vs M/s Sonata Information Technology Ltd.
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 24972 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Loss on account of error trade conducted on behalf of the clients is to be viewed as an integral part of carrying on share broking business and accepted as business loss, not speculation loss.
CLSA India Private Limited Vs ACIT
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 24971 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
It is well settled principles of law that consistency is the hallmark of judicial proceedings. Moreover, public policy requires consistency. Therefore, fair market value declared by the assessee for computing the capital gain cannot be disturbed.
Shri Vinod Kumar Guru Vs Income Tax Officer
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 24970 (ITAT-JABALPUR)
-
Nothing was brought on record by the assessee to establish that the agricultural operations were carried on prior to his purchase and after purchase.
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs M/s GRK Reddy & Sons (HUF)
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 24969 (HC-MADRAS)
-
Assets u/s 2(ea) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, does not cover offshore assets of an offshore trust. Therefore, assessee is not liable for wealth-tax.
Yashovardhan Birla Vs Dy. Commissioner of Wealth Tax
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 24958 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Assessee is not entitled for exemption u/s.54F of the Act for purchase of two residential houses at two different locations on two different dates. The position remains same even after amendment to section 54F by the Finance Act, 2014 w.e.f. 01.04.2015.
Mr. M.S.Amaresan Vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 24957 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Section 54F
-
During pendency of assessment on remand, assuming that loss was incorrectly determined for AY 2014-15 is premature and uncalled for.
Shelf Drilling Ron Tappmeyer Limited Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax International Taxation
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 24956 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 240
-
Distribution rights granted by assessee to its distribution agent is only a commercial right / Broad Cast reproduction right and not copyright and consequently considertation received by the assessee for the same cannot be treated as royalty or fees for included services under Article 12 of the India-USA DTAA
M/s.NGC Network Asia LLC Vs Dy. Director of Income Tax (International Tax)
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 24951 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
A father as a guardian may manage the affairs with regard to the shares standing in the name of his minor sons, but this will not make him the beneficial owner of the shares as no benefit or advantage arising out of the shares had accrued to the father.
Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Kamalbhai Jayantilal Shah
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 24950 (ITAT-SURAT)
-
An income tax inspection and/ or investigation would be permissible only for a past event but not for possible future contingencies.
M/s Mectec Vs CIT
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 24945 (HC-AP)
-
Revenue, for AY 2013-14, incorrectly taxed the advance amount, forfeited by the assessee on an umaterialized property deal, under the head Income from Other Sources applying the provisions of Sec. 56(2)(ix).
Meera Goyal Vs Income Tax Officer
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 24944 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 56(2)(ix)
-
When the main judgment of the High Court cannot be effected in any manner, no relief can be granted by this Court in the special leave petition filed against order rejecting review application to review the main judgment of the High Court.
T.K. DAVID Vs KURUPPAMPADY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. & ORS.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24931 (SC)
-
When the new and old address of the assessee are in the same locality, it cannot be believed that the assessee does not make such arrangement with the postal department. If the assessee does not make any such arrangement, the reason for the non-service of notice would be attributable to the assessee alone.
Amarjeet Kaur Bawa Vs ITO
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 24930 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
Section 54F is beneficial provision and should be interpreted liberally and the Assessing Officer has to see the end utilization of net sale consideration in the way prescribed in Section 54F.
Shri Ramaiah Dorairaj Vs ITO
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 24929 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 54F
-
Just because the assessee had made payments through banking channels to the vendors and recorded the diamonds purchased in its stock book does not make the transactions to be genuine with conclusive evidence.
Karni Jewellers Vs Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 24928 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
-
It is not possible to take two different stands one in income tax proceedings and other in wealth tax proceedings. A distinction is required to be drawn between the two activities i.e., let out or commercial exploitation.
M/s. Shastha Pharma Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. Vs Wealth Tax Officer
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 24927 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 24
-
There is a conceptual difference between the power of review and the power to reassess, that the Assessing Officer has no power to review, but he has a power to reassess, that the reassessment should be based on fulfillment of certain preconditions and that if the concept of change of opinion is removed, then in the garb of reopening the assessment, review would take place.
M/s. Seshasayee Paper & Boards Ltd. Vs Union of India, rep. by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Central II), The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24921 (HC-MADRAS)
-
Mr. Cyrus Mistry's action of supplying documents to the income tax department, without any authorization of the company even though which were apparently obtained by him in the fiduciary capacity, almost immediately after being removed as Chairman of the Tata Sons, cannot be said to be influenced by call of a pure conscious and high ground of morality.
Sir Dorabji Tata Trust Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24914 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
The receipt of money of Rs 1.20 crores is a movable asset for which no registration is warranted. Even oral gift is permissible and it need not be deduced into writing especially when it is done amongst close family members as there are least chances to suspect the same.
Shri Mahesh Arun Gawli Vs ACIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24913 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.