-
The taxability arises in the hands of the employees on the date of exercise, hence no TDS would arise at the time of vesting transaction.
NXP India Pvt.Ltd Vs The Dy.Commissioner of Income-tax
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22557 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 192
-
The payment of non-compete fee was capital expenditure in the hands of the assessee, on which the assessee is not entitled to claim depreciation u/s 32 of the Act.
Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt.ltd Vs The DCIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22556 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
Given the pandemic situation in the country, it is, all the more necessary for every employer company to take care of its employees as also advised by Ministry of Labour and Employment.
Pandhes Infracon Pvt Ltd Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22555 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
It is settled position of law that within stipulated time, application has to be made before the concerned authority and again within specified time, the project has to be completed and after completion, the Municipal Authority/local authority has to give a completion certificate only then the deduction u/s.80IB(10) is justified.
Shewale & Sons Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22554 (ITAT-PUNE) · Section 80-IB(10)
-
On a plain literal interpretation of Sec.54F, it can safely be gathered that the same only contemplates ownership of more than one residential house on the date of transfer of the Original' asset, for rendering the assessee ineligible for claim of deduction under the said statutory provision.
Chandramohan Manohar Potdar Vs ACIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22553 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 54F
-
Following the order passed by the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in taxpayer's own case for AY 2007-08 we are of the considered view that CIT (A) has rightly deleted the adjustment made by the ld. TPO while determining the ALP and royalty paymen for its Tajola plant as nil because when it is not in dispute that the expenditure or payment of royalty has been paid / incurred for the purpose of business, it cannot be disallowed on the ground that it has failed to generate any economic value for the taxpayer's business.
DCIT, CIRCLE 2 (1) , NEW DELHI. VERSUS M/S. ASAHI INDIA GLASS LIMITED AND (VICE-VERSA)
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22552 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83372&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Expenditure involved in conduct of the camps and distribution of medicines, food and cloth forms and an integral part of conducting of field camps by the assessee trust in imparting the education. They are directly and also integrally connected with the type of education imparted by the assessee trust. We are unable to accept with the finding of the ld. CIT (A).
M/S UMALOCK CHARITABLE TRUST VERSUS ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, MEERUT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22551 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83373&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The assessee has declared income from letting out building as income from business for the assessment year 2010-11 and 2011-12. It is an admitted fact that the assessee had let out 25% of the building in the assessment years under consideration. It cannot be said that the portion of the building is not entitled for depreciation. In our opinion, the order of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case we direct the Assessing Officer to assess the income from letting out building under the head income from business and to grant depreciation for the assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12.
M/S. MUTHOOTTU MINI FINANCIERS LTD. VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, KOCHI.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22550 (ITAT-COCHIN) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83377&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Assessee society has been running a school and that the society is also having recognition from the Department of Education, Government of Haryana. As observed by the Ld. CIT (E) that the school was being run from premises that consisted of one hall and eight rooms only and was actually situated in a Gali. The Ld. CIT (Exemptions) has observed that it was unbelievable that receipts to the tune of nearly ₹ 1 crore are generated from such small premises.Exemptions) has observed that it was unbelievable that receipts to the tune of nearly ₹ 1 crore are generated from such small premises.
LADY FLOREANCE EDUCATION SOCIETY VERSUS CIT (EXEMPTIONS) , CHANDIGARH
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22549 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83379&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Assessee is deceased and the appeal is represented by the legal heir of the assessee. Admittedly, the taxes were not paid by the assessee alongwtih return of income, though repeated pleas, were raised before the authorities below to sell the gold ornaments seized and adjust the sale proceeds against the tax payable by the assessee, but no such exercise was carried out by the Department. Thereafter, the assessee claims that she sold house property and paid the taxes due with interest on returned income before her death during 18.03.2015 to 12.08.2015.
MR. CHANDER MOHAN MERWAH VERSUS THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-12, NEW DELHI.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22548 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83381&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Since the AO has issued the notice u/s. 153C and the assessment has been completed u/s. 153C therefore, we do not find and substance in the additional grounds raised by the assessee. Accordingly the above grounds are dismissed.
MANOJ KUMAR JAIN C/O. O.P. SAPRA & ASSOCIATES VERSUS DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE INCOME TAX OFFICE, GHAZIABAD
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22547 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83382&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The assessee had not claimed the said professional expenses in its profit & loss account and had capitalized the same under work in progress i.e. Building under Construction in fixed assets schedule. The order of the CIT(A) deleting the addition made by the AO u/s 40(a(ia) on the said capitalised expenses is upheld.
Conwood MedipHarma Pvt. Ltd Vs ACIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22546 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 40(a)(ia)
-
By virtue of the said agreement cum GPA, assessee has parted with his right in the property because he had received the entire sale consideration and has also handed over the possession of the said property. The vendee becomes the owner of the property u/s.53A of the TP Act and u/s.2(47) of the IT Act, it is a transfer of the property.
Sama Om Reddy Vs The Income Tax Officer
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22545 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
-
The directions of the co-ordinate bench was limited to grant of registration and cannot be construed otherwise especially where the statue requires that condonation application has to be specifically disposed-off stating clearly the reasons for either condoning the delay or rejecting the application.
Urban Improvement Trust Vs The CIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22544 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · Section 12AA
-
It is evident that the AO had initiated the penalty duly applying his mind for the addition of undisclosed profits u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act and subsequently issued show cause notice for levying penalty u/s 271AAA of the Act pending finalization of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) which is incorrect action.
T.Saimatha Vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22543 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM) · Sections 271AAA, 271(1)(c)
-
Where the assessee-bank has relied on the declaration so furnished by the customer, there is no malafide which is reflected in the action of the assessee in not deducting the TDS and the assessee cannot be fastened with the penalty u/s 271C.
Union Bank of India Vs Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS)
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22542 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · Section 271C
-
Where the source of time deposit has been declared by the assessee as sale of the property and where transaction relating to capital gains has been offered in the return of income and ultimately, brought to tax by the AO, the latter is well within his jurisdiction to assess such capital gains as the same has been suo-moto offered to tax by the assessee in the return of income filed in pursuance to notice u/s 148.
Shri Vijay Kumar Vs The ITO
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22541 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
-
Since no satisfactory explanation has been offered by the assessee about the nature and source of payment of cash, the value of the investment is deemed to be the income of the assessment of the relevant F.Y. and accordingly, the same was added to the hands of the assessee.
RAMESHWAR LAL, C/O V.N. PUROHIT & CO, CAS VERSUS DCIT, CIRCLE 71 (1) , NEW DELHI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22540 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83362&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
According to the provisions of section 253 (6) of the act, appeal to the appellate tribunal shall be filed in the prescribed form and shall be verified in the prescribed manner. According to rule 47 (1) of The Income Tax Rules 1962, the appeal shall be signed by the persons specified in sub rule 3 of rule 45.
SOUTH STAFFORDSHIRE PLC VERSUS DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) , CIRCLE-3 (1) (2) , NEW DELHI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22539 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83365&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
From the reasons recorded, we find that the AO had no clarity as to what he considers as income escaped assessment whether the commission on the entries provided or the total amount of entries - while calculating the assessment proceedings, AO made addition of the entries which he himself has accepted that these entries have been provided to other companies as accommodation entries. In that case, there is an inbuilt contradiction in the action of the Assessing Officer while concluding the assessment proceeding.
M/S HOMEWAY MARKETING PVT. LTD., M/S HOPEWITH ADMARK & CONSULTANCY SERVICES PVT. LTD., VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-12 (4) , NEW DELHI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22538 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83369&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.