-
There is no such material or finding in the impugned order that any such kind of project or supervisory activity was carried out for more than six months in India. There has to be some kind of onsite planning and supervision activity which is completely absent here in this case, firstly, for the reason that the services have been rendered from outside India and secondly, there is no finding that any personnel of assessee have been performing any kind of such activity in India for a period of more than six months.
IDIADA AUTOMOTIVE TECHNOLOGY, SH. S. KALYANASUNDARAM VERSUS DCIT, CIRCLE-3 (2), NEW DELHI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22637 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83490&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The govt. of West Bengal has decided to grant the subsidy by way of IPA for setting up of large/medium/small scale eligible unit which is prescribed in the WBIS 2000 and the unit has to be set up in either group B or C areas prescribed in the said scheme (WBIS 2000). We note that the assessee had set up a new unit in the Bankura District of West Bengal area which falls in the group C area of the Scheme WBIS 2000.
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-3 (1), KOLKATA. VERSUS M/S. SOVAISPAT LIMITED
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22636 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83491&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
As there is no change in the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned dispute resolution panel in assessee’s own case for assessment year 14-15 has also rejected Modi care Limited as comparable and accepted the transactional net margin method as the most appropriate method, we respectfully following the decision of the coordinate bench direct learned TPO to adopt transactional net margin method as the most appropriate method and also not to take Modicare Ltd as the comparable.
M/S ORIFLAME INDIA PVT. LTD. VERSUS ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SPECIAL RANGE : 7, NEW DELHI.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22635 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83492&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Having regard to the rival contentions and Rule 9B of the I.T.Rules, we find that the assessee is not claiming the expenditure incurred on the acquisition of movies but the assessee is claiming loss due to non-recovery of advances paid. Rule 9B only provides a method of computing deduction available in respect of expenditure on acquisition of distribution rights of feature films, but does not address the sequence in which deductions are to be allowed.
M/S. ASIAN THEATRES PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 13 (1) HYDERABAD
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22634 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83495&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The petitioner Association is directed to submit a representation with respect to nil/lower deduction of income tax to the authorities concerned, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such submission being made, the authorities concerned shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders, on merits and in accordance with law, after affording due opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner Association within a period of four weeks thereafter. Till such time, the order of interim injunction already granted, shall stand extended.
INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK OFFICERS' ASSOCIATION VERSUS UNION OF INDIA, THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES, NEW DELHI, THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22633 (HC-MADRAS) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82951&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
It is well settled principles of law that guideline value is only to guide the Sub-Registrar to find out the correct market value for the purpose of collecting stamp duty. Market value is not a constant figure. It may vary depending upon the various factors. Therefore, the guideline value may not always represent the market value of the property.
THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 1, CHENNAI VERSUS SHRI VUMMIDI AMARENDRAN, CHENNAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22632 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83484&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
In view of the consistent finding of the Tribunal since assessment year 2008-09, respectfully following the finding of the Tribunal for assessment year 2008-09 to 2012-13 we set aside the order of the lower authorities and hold the activity of purchase and sale of shares in question as investment activity to be assessed under the head capital gain. In this regard, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd Vs CIT Where shares are held as investment in the investee company, may be for the purpose of having controlling interest therein.
M/S. PURAN ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD. VERSUS ACIT, CIRCLE-20 (1) , NEW DELHI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22631 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83485&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
In this case, the unnamed Chartered Accountant had purportedly advised the petitioner to delay in filing returns. He could also have not signed the report of audit in the prescribed form. It is perhaps the report of the Chartered Accountant who finalized the account for the petitioner later was made available for the assessment and the return was filed belatedly.
M/S. IG3 INFRA LIMITED, VERSUS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CHENNAI, CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES, UNION OF INDIA
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22630 (HC-MADRAS) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82946&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
As the estimation of Income Tax is essentially a fact finding exercise, which becomes final at the hands of the final fact finding authority of Income Tax namely, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and we would not have entertained this appeal which lies under section 260A of the Act, only on the 'substantial question of law' arising from the order of the learned Appellate Tribunal.
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CHENNAI. VERSUS M/S. S. ALBERT & CO. P. LTD.,
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22629 (HC-MADRAS) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82948&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Clause 3 of the Memorandum of Association which uses the expression “primarily for the benefit of Catholics”. Others may be admitted without distinction of caste and creed” has been thoroughly examined by the Department several time and only on the satisfaction, the Tribunal granted exemption under Section 80G(5)(iii) of the Act to the Assessee. No explanation is forthcoming on behalf of the appellants – Revenue as to why the exemption was granted to the respondent - Society for the previous years from 1963 till the year 2009.
THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME – TAX EXEMPTIONS, BENGALURU. VERSUS C.B.C.I. SOCIETY FOR MEDICAL EDUCATION, BENGALURU
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22628 (HC-KARNATKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82945&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Intimation issued u/s 143(1) of the Act does not preclude the assessee from filing a revised return of income. More so, when assessment order u/s 143(3) of the Act was also passed in the present case of the assessee, thus the intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act loses its importance. And we find in this case the assessee has rightly filed the revised return of income u/s 139(5) of the Act within the stipulated time frame as per statute.
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-13 (2) , KOLKATA. VERSUS M/S. PADMA LOGISTICS & KHANIJ PVT. LTD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22627 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83475&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
None of the conditions is fulfilled in favour of the Revenue for imposing penalty. As it appears on record that at the very onset of filing of return the assessee explained the reasons for not including the amount in question being 3.79 crores received as “arbitration award” in its taxable income by annexing Note 7 relying upon the content of the India-Netherlands Treaty. Such Explanation has not been found to be false by the authorities below neither there is any finding to that effect as on record. Even assuming the assessee fails to substantiate the explanation, he has been able to demonstrate that the explanation is bona fide.
VAN OORD DREDGING AND MARINE CONT RACTORS BV VERSUS ASST DIT (IT) 2 (2) NOW TRANSFERRED TO DCIT (IT) 4 (3) (1) , MUMBAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22626 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83478&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The assessee is State under Article 289 of the constitution of India, and is entitled to immunity from taxation under the Income Tax Act 1961.
MAHARASHTRA STATE BOARD OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER 23 (2) (2) MUMBAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22625 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83479&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
As decided in own case Revenue received by the assessee from offshore supply of goods to ONGC could not be taxed in India. We thus finding no infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) in context of the issue under consideration uphold the same to the said extent. If the service provider does not make available the technical knowledge, experience, skill know how or process etc., then the consideration received for rendering of such services cannot be characterised as royalty for the purpose of Article XII(3)(g) of India-Australia DTAA.
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (IT) -2 (1) (1) MUMBAI VERSUS CAMERON AUSTRALASIA PTY LTD. C/O PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS PVT. LTD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22624 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83480&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
As per Section 144C of the Act, it is mandatory for the Assessing Officer to pass draft Assessment Order. But instead of that, the Assessing Officer vide order dated 18.10.2019 merely captioned the final Assessment Order as Draft Assessment Order along with issuance of notices under Section 156 and 274 read with Section 271(1)(c) of the Act which means a final Assessment order u/s 144C was passed without following the mandatory provisions of Section 144C.
NIKON INDIA PVT. LTD. VERSUS DCIT CIRCLE-3 (1) GURGAON, HARYANA
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22623 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83481&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Due to the prevailing situation of the pandemic COVID-19 and Resolution of the Bar Counsel of West Bengal directing the lawyers not to appear in any judicial proceedings, none of the Counsel are present to assist the Court.
SANJAY JHUNJHUNWALA Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22622 (HC-CALCUTTA)
-
The AO while considering the stay application has to act as a quasi-judicial authority, which means that he has to apply his mind to all relevant factors and thereafter, take a decision which is just, fair and reasonable.
Mansukhlal Amritlal Modi Vs The Income Tax Officer Ward
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22621 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
Deductions u/s. 10A/10B have to be made while computing the gross total income of the eligible undertaking under Chapter IV of the Act and not at the stage of computation of the total income under Chapter VI.
M/s. Comstar Automative Technologies Private Ltd. Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22620 (HC-MADRAS) · Section 10B
-
Keeping in mind the fact that petitioner was the main person controlling/ directing affairs of the group within and outside India and there is large scale tax evasion and investigation is still in progress and there is a strong apprehension that petitioner may not return and, thus, will not be available for investigation, he cannot be granted permission to travel abroad at this stage.
Piyoosh Kumar Goyal Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22619 (HC-DELHI)
-
No appeal to be time barred in the wake of Coronavirus shutdown of.
IN RE : COGNIZANCE FOR EXTENSION OF LIMITATION
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22618 (SC)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.