-
S. 153A/ 153C: The seized incriminating material have to pertain to the AY in question and have co-relation, document-wise, with the AY. This requirement u/s 153C is essential and becomes a jurisdictional fact. It is an essential condition precedent that any money, bullion or jewellery or other valuable articles or thing or books of accounts or documents seized or requisitioned should belong to a person other than the person referred to in S. 153A. Kamleshbhai Dharamshibhai Patel 31 TM.com 50 (Guj) approved. SSP Aviation 20 TM.com 214 (Del) distinguished
CIT vs. Sinhgad Technical Education Society
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13473 (SC) · Sections 153A, 153C
-
S. 115JB: As Insurance companies are required to prepare accounts as per the Insurance Act and not as per Schedule VI to the Companies Act, s. 115JB does not apply. Insurance companies are not taxed on commercial profits but on profits as computed under the Insurance Act. Accordingly, income earned on sale/redemption of investments is not chargeable to tax
Oriental Insurance Co Ltd vs. DCIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13472 (HC-DELHI) · Section 115JB
-
S. 68: The use of deceptive loan entries to bring unaccounted money into banking channels plagues the legitimate economy of our country. The mere fact that the identity of the lenders is established & payments are made by cheques does not mean they are genuine. If the lenders do not have the financial strength to lend such huge sums and if there is no explanation as to their relationship with the assessee, no collateral security and no agreement, the transactions have to be treated as bogus unexplained credits
Pr CIT vs. Bikram Singh
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13471 (HC-DELHI) · Section 68
-
S. 68: Argument that the assessee did not maintain "books of account" and so s. 68 will not apply is not acceptable. It is incumbent on every assessee doing business to maintain proper books of account. It may be in any form. If the assessee has not done so, he cannot be allowed to take advantage of his own wrong. Burden lies on the assessee to show from where he has received the amount and what is its nature
Arunkumar J. Muchhala vs. CIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13470 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 68
-
ITAT - Deduction allowable u/s 43B for stamp-duty paid on demerger.
Mahyco Seeds Ltd vs. Dy.CIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13469 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Sections 35DD, 43B
-
ITAT - No TDS u/s 194J on payment for subscription of e-magazine/journal by assessee engaged in carrying out research for private equity investments as the same is neither royalty nor FTS.
Kitara capital Private Limited vs. ITO
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13468 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 194J
-
ITAT - In case of remand of quantum addition to AO, penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) should also be remanded.
ST Microelectronics Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ACIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13467 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
ITAT - Providing free air travel, stay and food in hotels, local car conveyance etc. for prescribing medicines of the assessee (a pharma company) is akin to giving commission and certainly in contravention of the public policy. Disallowance of 50% of sales promotion expenses justified.
OCHOA Laboratories Ltd. vs. DCIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13466 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
ITAT - Alleged gift of immovable property to her daughter should be treated as ‘sale’ and Sec. 50C applicabile.
Smt. Balwant Kaur Mangat Vs ITO
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13465 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
ITAT - DRP has powers to propose TP-adjustment even though AO/TPO did not propose such adjustment in the draft order.
Bausch & Lomb India Pvt. Ltd vs. ACIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13464 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 263
-
ITAT - Delay in furnishing information under the various codes asked by issuing notice by the ITO was not willful but it was due to lack of required infrastructure and man power. No Penalty U/s 272A(2)(c) on bank.
Branch Manager, State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur Versus JDIT, (I&CI), Jaipur
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13463 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=57584&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Where the tax has been deducted on the strength of beneficial provisions of DTAA, provisions of section 206AA cannot be invoked to insist that the tax deduction should be @ 20%.
The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) -Circle 1, Pune Versus Calderys France, C/o Calderys India Refractories Ltd.
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13462 (ITAT-PUNE) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=57585&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Where in case of transfer of rights in favour of the Developer (JDA), assessee contended that, in subsequent years he has paid the taxes and therefore, there was no loss to revenue or escapement of income. Re-assessment is void.
Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Shri Y. Mohan Rao
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13447 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=57525&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - In case of gift of immovable property to daughter, assessee failed to prove that mistakenly instead of gift deed, sale deed was made, no exemption allowed u/s 47(iii) as gift. Addition u/s 50C confirmed.
Smt. Balwant Kaur Mangat Versus ITO, Ward-1 (2), Ghaziabad
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13446 (ITAT-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=57528&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Even where books of account were not rejected, since the AO has clearly established that the purchases were bogus, there is no justification for accepting the contentions that only part of the purchase should be disallowed.
M/s Shree Krishan Kripa Feeds, C/o Kapil Goel, Adv. Versus ITO, Ward-1, Panipat
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13445 (ITAT-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=57529&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - In case of capital contribution by the partners in the partnership firm, the assessee could not be expected to prove the source of source and no addition u/s 68 could be made on this account. It could be made in the hands of the respective partners only.
Shivam Impex Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13444 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=57532&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - When Appellant is doing business, then it was incumbent on him to maintain proper books and/ or books of account. It may be in any form. Therefore, if he had not maintained it, then he can not be allowed to take advantage of his own wrong. Addition u/s 68 in respect of gifts from NRI friend confirmed.
Shri. Arunkumar J. Muchhala Versus The Commissioner of Income Tax
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13443 (HC-BOMBAY) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=69788&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - ITAT, turning a blind eye, has erred in holding that, assessee has discharged his onus merely because the unsecured loan was advanced through the banking channels. Creditors fail the test of creditworthiness and the transactions fail the test of genuineness. Additions u/s 68 confirmed.
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax – 7 Versus Bikram Singh
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13442 (HC-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=69789&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Simply establishing creditors’ identity and routing the transaction through cheque, cannot by itself mean that the transactions are genuine. as assessee failed to discharge the ‘initial’ onus of establishing creditworthiness and genuineness qua the creditors, addition u/s 68 confirmed.
PCIT. vs. Bikram Singh
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13441 (HC-DELHI)
-
CCTV cameras are culture of the day and promotes good governance. All Tribunals including the ITAT should have CCTVs with audio recording. The footage of the CCTV Camera will not be available under the RTI and will not be supplied to anyone without permission of the concerned High Court
Pradyuman Bisht vs. UOI
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13437 (SC)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.