-
In case of short TDS, no Sec.40(a)(ia) expense disallowance.
Hindustan Thompson Associates Private Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income - tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19339 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 40(a)(ia)
-
The cost of acquisition of know- how under development being a self-generated asset is not ascertainable, and hence, no chargeable capital gains would arise.
Bharat Serums And Vaccines Ltd Vs ACIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19338 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
ITAT - The final assessment order has been passed after the end of one month from the date of receipt of the directions of the DRP by the Assessing Officer. Therefore, order passed by the Assessing Officer is void ab initio and liable to be quashed as the final assessment order is time barred.
M/S. DENTSPLY INDIA (P) LTD. VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-10 (1) NEW DELHI
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19334 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=75431&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Valuation - property in question cannot be valued as has been directed by the CIT in view of the litigations underway and also the fact that the property is in the possession of the tenants.
WHITE ROSE HOLDINGS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. VERSUS ITO-13 (3) (2), MUMBAI
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19333 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=75432&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Since developer-SPV was promoted by Housing Board, notional rentals cannot be charged u/s. 23 as assessee is not 'owner'.
Bengal DCL Housing Development Vs DCIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19332 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · Section 23
-
ITAT - Sale deed execution, not POA execution, is relevant for transfer of property and for capital gains purposes.
Shri Vishnubhai Vithalbhai Patel (HUF) Vs The DCIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19331 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
-
HC - Since new unit was not expansion of existing line of the business of the assessee and was new product line altogether, interest u/s 36(1)(iii) disallowed.
Tube Investments Vs The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19324 (HC-MADRAS) · Section 36(1)(iii)
-
Since the assessee was covered under the expression 'State', therefore payments made by the assessee to its employees towards death cum retirement gratuity, commutation of pension or leave salary would not be liable for TDS to the extent permitted under the provisions of section 10(10)(i), 10(10A) and 10(10AA).
Mahatma Gandhi University Vs The Income-tax Officer(TDS)
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19323 (ITAT-COCHIN)
-
Amount paid u/s. 37(1) to Mauritian company for raising funds for sister-concern is disallowed.
Sivan Securities (P) Ltd Vs The DCIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19322 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 37(1)
-
Merely because the assessee had invested in several small properties, it would not make the transaction a business one.
Munish Singla Vs Addl. CIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19321 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
-
Rental income derived from properties held as stock in trade cannot be assessed as income from house property.
Kanakia Spaces Pvt. Ltd Vs DCIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19320 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Membership fees paid by the assessee for membership of Mumbai Cricket Association for a third person u/s 37(1) as assessee failed to prove that expenses were incurred wholly & exclusively for the purpose of business is disallowed.
Top Class Capital Markets Vs DCIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19319 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
In a case where the assessee participated in the entire proceedings, if such a defect in the notice was not allowed to be cured, the purpose/intent of sec.292B would be defeated.
Shri. Rajan Kalimuthu Vs The Income Tax Officer, International Taxation
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19312 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
-
Assessee's claim for Sec. 80IA benefit on interest on loans/advances to employees citing absence of direct nexus with industrial undertaking is rejected.
The Tata Power Company Ltd Vs ACIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19311 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Rule 4A of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Members (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1963 empowers the Selection Board to evolve its own procedure.
Puneet Sharma Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19310 (HC-DELHI)
-
Since the builder would fall in the category of other institution and therefore booking of the flat with the builder has to be treated as construction of flat by the assessee. Therefore, Applies 3 years timeline for Sec. 54 benefit
Seema Sobti Vs ACIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19304 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 54
-
If the Revenue is objecting to the appointment of the assessee as Debt Recovery Agent, then, principally the revenue has accepted that the transfer of loan has taken place. Further, when the Revenue is objecting to indemnity of 20%, then also the revenue is accepting that actual transfer has taken place.
GE Capital Services India Vs The Dy. C.I.T
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19303 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
In view of the above judicial precedents, respectfully following them, we hold that assessee is entitled for tax credit of federal as well as state taxes paid by him u/s 91 of the Act.
Aditya Khanna Vs ITO (International Taxation)
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19297 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 91
-
If a normal donation is doubted by the AO about its genuineness, and identity of the donors, the addition cannot be made u/s 68 of the income tax act in the case of the trust as it has already been offered as an income.
Shree Shiv Vankeshawar Educational & Social Welfare Trust Vs ACIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19296 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section115BBC
-
When faced with the situation of a software glitch that prevents an Assessee from either filing a return or claiming a benefit, the Courts have repeatedly had to permit the manual filing of return/claims and and have directed the Respondents to act on such manual filing of returns.
Cosmo Films Limited Vs CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES, MINISTRY OF FINANCE
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19295 (HC-DELHI)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.