-
ITAT - Amount received on account of reimbursement which has been received over and above the amount of FTS cannot be included and taxed as part of FTS.
Gemological Institute International Inc, C/o GIA India Laboratory P Ltd. Versus Dy. CIT 2 (2) (1), Mumbai
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12816 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=55970&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
SC - Income earned from the shopping center - Having regard to the terms and conditions on which the leasehold rights were taken by the assessee in auction, constructed the market area thereupon and gave the same to various persons on sub-licensing basis, the assessee would be treated as deemed owner of these premises in terms of Section 27(iiib).
RAJ DADARKAR & ASSOCIATES Versus ACIT – CC-46
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12815 (SC) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=69111&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - No deduction u/s. 80-IA on ‘Clean Development Mechanism’ (CDM) receipt by the assessee in respect of it’s two power generating units.
S.P. Spinning Mills Pvt. Ltd. Versus Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1 (1), Salem
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12814 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=55950&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Pending disputed sale price assessee justified in keeping the sales in contingent sales account as it does not accrue to the assessee for the relevant financial year.
ACIT, Circle-1 (1), Guntur Versus M/s. JOCIL Limited
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12813 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=55873&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Though FDR was for obtaining letter of credit to purchase machinery but so far as interest earned thereon is concerned, that is nothing but income through other sources.
The Commissioner of Income Tax Versus M/s Bhawal Synthetics (India) Udaipur
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12812 (HC-RAJASTHAN) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=69105&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Transfer Pricing: Law explained as to when the “Resale Price Method” (RPM) can be used with respect to related parties under Rule 10B (1)(b) + Law on determining arm’s length rate of the corporate guarantee commission/fee explained
Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd vs. ACIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12811 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
S. 271(1)(c) penalty proceedings are “quasi-criminal” and ought to comply with the principles of natural justice. The non-striking of the irrelevant portion in the show-cause notice means that the AO is not firm about the charge against the assessee and the assessee is not made aware as to which of the two limbs of s. 271(1)(c) he has to respond. The fact that the assessment order is clear about the charge against the assessee is irrelevant (Samson Perinchery (Bom) followed, Kaushalya 216 ITR 660 (Bom) distinguished)
Meherjee Cassinath Holdings Pvt. Ltd vs. ACIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12810 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 271(1)(c)
-
Severe strictures passed against the High Court for "inconsistent decision-making" and passing orders which are "palpably illegal, faulty and contrary to the basic principles of law" and by ignoring "large number of binding decisions of the Supreme Court" and giving "impermissible benefit to accused". Law on condonation of delay explained. CBI directed to implement mechanism to ensure that all appeals are filed in time
State Of Jharkhand vs. Lalu Prasad Yadav
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12809 (SC)
-
ITAT - Expenditure on repairs of the building is merely incurred to refurnish and renovate the existing structure and is not in the nature of creation of a capital asset. No structural changes is shown to have been made by the assessee while incurring such expenditure. A repair ordinarily involves renewal and restoration of the existing wear and tear. Such expenditure is in the nature of current repair in spite of major expenses.
The DCIT Circle-1, Ahmedabad Versus M/s. Ahmedabad Packaging Industries Ltd.
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12808 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=55936&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Transfer pricing adjustment - Reimbursements have to be included in the cost base and the operating margins have to be computed accordingly.
Pernod Ricard India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon Versus Dy. CIT, Circle 8 (1), New Delhi, ACIT, Circle 14 (1)
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12807 (ITAT-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=55937&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Section 69C could not be applied to the facts of the case as the payments were through banking channels which were duly reflected in the books of accounts. No penalty u/s 271(1)(c).
Earthmoving Equipment Service Corporation Versus Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, 22 (2), Mumbai
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12806 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=55938&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Where the assessee is unable to furnish any explanation, duly supported, it cannot be said to be saved by clause (A) or clause (B) of Explanation 1 to s. 271(1)(c). Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) on false depreciation claim made by assessee company is valid.
Sundaram Fasteners Ltd. vs. ADIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12799 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
-
HC - No TDS u/s 195 on payment by assessee to foreign JV partner towards reimbursement of salary for seconded employees as the same is not FTS under India-UK DTAA.
DIT (International Taxation) vs. Marks & Spencer Reliance India Pvt. Ltd.
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12798 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
Transfer Pricing AMP Adjustment: Entire law on whether the advertisement expenditure incurred by the Indian AE towards brand of a foreign company can be treated as an “international transaction” and whether a notional adjustment can be made in the hands of the Indian AE towards compensation receivable from the foreign AE for “deemed brand development” explained
Hyundai Motor India Limited vs. DCIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12797 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
-
S. 271(1)(c): Bogus purchases cannot be assessed as 'unexplained expenditure' u/s 69C if the transactions are duly disclosed and payments are through banks. The fact that the sellers are not traceable and the assessee surrendered the bogus purchases does not justify levy of penalty. Mere non-striking of the options in the s. 274 notice does not render the penalty proceedings void if the assessment order shows due application of mind.
Earthmoving Equipment Service Corporation vs. DCIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12796 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 271(1)(c)
-
SC - Section 14A of the Act would apply to dividend income on which tax is payable under Section 115-O.
GODREJ & BOYCE MANUFACTURING COMPANY LIMITED Versus DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX & ANR.
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12795 (SC) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=69079&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - No exemption u/s 11 on subscription and delegates fees collected from members, based on the principle of mutuality.
Employers’ Federation of Southern India Versus Assistant Director of Income-Tax (Exemption) -III
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12794 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54947&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Interest income from Kisan Vikas Patra is taxable on cash basis.
Rashmi Dhariwal, New Delhi Versus ACIT, Circle-23 (1), New Delhi
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12793 (ITAT-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=55911&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
SC - Disallowance u/s 14A is applicable to dividend income on which tax is payable u/s. 115-O.
GODREJ & BOYCE MANUFACTURINGCOMPANY LIMITED Vs DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX& ANR.
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12787 (SC) · Section 14A
-
ITAT - Notice under section 143(2) not issued by the jurisdictional Income-tax Officer but issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax. Therefore the notice is invalid and consequently the assessment framed by the Income-tax Officer becomes void.
Krishnendu Chowdhury Versus Income-Tax Officer
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12777 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54620&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.