-
Assessee that the value of its shares in terms of clause (ii) of Explanation (a) of section 56(2)(viib) on the basis of the value of its land at market value which is ₹ 113 crores comes to ₹ 658.83 per share. Therefore, it is the submission of assessee that instead of taking the book value of the property at ₹ 47.81 crore as per the balance sheet, the lower authorities should have taken the fair market value of land which was converted from agricultural to institutional at ₹ 113,00,72,749/- and other assets of ₹ 9,17,608/-.
M/S INDIA CONVENTION AND CULTURE CENTRE PVT. LTD. VERSUS ITO, WARD-12 (2) , NEW DELHI.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20223 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=78242&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The assessee had an NRE account in Canara Bank in India. Although the assessee was non-resident earlier, he became a 'Resident and Ordinarily Resident' in the relevant previous year 2014-15. On the interest income earned from NRE FD account of ₹ 1.10 crore, the assessee claimed exemption u/s 10 (4)(ii) in the return of income. AO rejected the assessee's claim of exemption and brought to tax and the CIT(A) upheld it.
SHRI BABA SHANKAR RAJESH VERSUS THE ACIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20222 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=78246&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The requirement of commercial expediency should be judged in the context of prevailing socio-economic conditions. Tribunal committed serious error in concluding that the MoU between the assessee & Govt. of Karnataka is opposed to the public policy.
M/S. KANHAIYALAL DUDHERIA Vs THE JCIT, CIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20221 (HC-KARNATAKA) · Section 37(1)
-
The insurance companies are entitled to deduct TDS on the interest payable on the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal.
Mahila Senwati and Others Vs The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20220 (HC-MP)
-
Mere usage of term nodal agency or confirming party would not determine the fact that the assessee was acting on principle to principle basis.
Punjab Infrastructure Development Board Vs CIT-(TDS)
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20219 (HC-P&H)
-
The invocation of Sec. 241A was without authority of law in absence of refund being determined u/s 143(1).
Tata Communications Limited Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20218 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 143(1), 241A
-
The SARFAESI Act merely provides a recovery mechanism and nothing else.
Perfect Thread Mills Ltd Vs DCIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20217 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
None of the services provided involved any element of imparting of knowhow nor was there a transfer of any knowledge, skill or experience to fall within the ambit of royalty.
Van Oord Dredging and Marine Vs Dy.CIT (International Taxation)
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20216 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
The delay in completion of the project was completely circumstantial and neither the assessee nor the builders had any mala-fide intentions for such delay, hence benefit of Sec.54F cannot be denied.
Lalitkumar Kesarimal Jain Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20215 (ITAT-PUNE) · Section 54F
-
No lay man can execute a deed of mortgage of his property against the loan availed by a third party/ parties, until and unless the individual has substantial interest over them.
T.S. Hajee Moosa & Co Vs The ACIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20210 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
-
Both Sec.195(1) & Sec.40(a)(ia) calls for TDS deduction where the sum is chargeable and in the absence of chargeability to tax under the act, provisions of Sec.40(a)(ia) cannot be invoked.
JLC Electromet Pvt Ltd Vs ACIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20209 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · Section 195
-
Being a chairman in a company does not amount to holding a substantial interest therein in terms of the clear mandate of Explanation 3 to section 13 of the Act.
J.R.D. Tata Trust Vs The ITO
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20203 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Sections 11, 13
-
S. 10(38) Bogus LTCG from Penny Stock: The analysis of balance sheet & P&L account of the Co shows that astronomical increase in share price which led to returns of 491% for assesee was completely unjustified. The EPS & other financials parameters cannot justify price at which assessee claims to have sold shares to obtain Long Terms Capital Gains. It is not explained as to why anyone would purchase said shares at such high price
Suman Poddar vs. ITO
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20196 (HC-DELHI) · Section 10(38)
-
A concession given by Counsel, if it is a concession in law and contrary to the statutory rules, is not binding on the litigant for the reason that there cannot be any estoppel against law (see also Himalayan Cooperative Group Housing Society Vs. Balwan Singh (2015) 7 SCC 373 Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd vs. Mahendra Prasad Jakhmola & V. Ramesh vs. ACIT (Madras High Court)
Directorate of Elementary Education vs. Pramod Kumar Sahoo
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20195 (SC)
-
A concession given by Counsel, if it is a concession in law and contrary to the statutory rules, is not binding on the litigant for the reason that there cannot be any estoppel against law (see also Himalayan Cooperative Group Housing Society Vs. Balwan Singh (2015) 7 SCC 373 Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd vs. Mahendra Prasad Jakhmola & V. Ramesh vs. ACIT (Madras High Court)
Directorate of Elementary Education vs. Pramod Kumar Sahoo
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20194 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
-
S. 143(3): If the case is selected for limited scrutiny of a specific issue, the AO has no jurisdiction to make additions or disallowances on other issues.
Vijay Kumar vs. ITO
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20193 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH) · Section 143(3)
-
The words 'as it thinks fit' used under Section 254(1) is of the widest amplitude.
Reham Foundation Kandhari Lane Lal Bagh Lucknow Vs Commissioner Of Income Tax Exemption U.P State Cons & Infra.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20192 (HC-ALLAHABAD) · Section 12AA
-
The amount of accumulated profit needs to be worked out on the date of such payment/advancement of loan.
Asian Business Connection Private Limited Vs DCIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20189 (ITAT-INDORE)
-
The assessee would be afforded adequate opportunity to explain his case before passing an order on objective appraisal of the evidence available.
Epson India Private Limited Vs The ACIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20176 (HC-KARNATAKA) · Section 148
-
There is no merit in the present appeal and no question arises for consideration. Hence, the petition stands dismissed.
Genpact India (Previously Known As Genpact Infrastructure (Kolkata) Pvt. Ltd Vs Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-4
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20175 (HC-DELHI)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.