-
ITAT - AO, in case of Unexplained investment in immovable property and making addition u/s 69, before referring the matter to DVO should have rejected the books of account of the assessee, that too after satisfying the conditions precedent as envisaged u/s 145(3).
Asstt. CIT, Central Circle II, Lucknow Versus Shri Ramu Gupta
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11122 (ITAT-LUCKNOW) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=50602&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Sale of shares whether genuine, which was substantiated by bogus documents? Whether addition u/s 69 or u/s 68?
ACIT, Circle-6, Ahmedabad Versus Smt. Jaya Vineet Agarwal
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11121 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=51337&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - In case of joint ownership of property (property purchased by the husband and wife in the joint names), the share of the co-owner shall be determined as per the ratio of their contribution in the purchase consideration.
Shri Ravindra Sunku and Smt. Roopa Ravindra Sunku Versus Income Tax Officer, International Taxation Ward 2 (1), Bangalore
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11120 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=51339&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Since assessee has maintained that books of accounts are required u/s 44AA(2) but had not got the accounts audited as required u/s 44AB particularly when loss was claimed on the gross receipts, reopening the assessment confirmed.
Artech Technocrate Pvt. Ltd. Versus The ITO Ward-1 (3), Ahmedabad
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11119 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=51197&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Where assessee retail vendor had made cash payment to the wholesale licensee agent, same would fall under the exception provided in Rule 6DD(k) of the Rules.
Tushar Kanti Banerjee Versus Income-tax Officer, Wd-1 (2), Asansol
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11118 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=51342&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - A complete mechanism has been provided for dealing with Settlement applications and the said mechanism is a complete code in itself and merely because of the fact that an interim admission order has been passed under Section 245(D)(2C), it does not mean that any irreparable loss has been caused to the Income Tax Department.
Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) Versus Maa Vaishno Real Estate and Another, S.S. Associates & One Another, S.T. Associates & One Another, Saakar Reality & One Another
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11116 (HC-MP) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=66271&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Penalty levied for non-fulfillment some dealership condition is allowable expenditure u/s 37.
Shri Pitamber Wadhwani Versus ACIT, Circle 3 (1), Indore.
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11115 (ITAT-INDORE) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=51325&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Provisions of section 40A(3) are not applicable to capital expenditure.
Nandu Antram Rajput Versus DCIT Central Circle-2 (3), Pune
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11114 (ITAT-PUNE) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=50721&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - If the assessee or the deductee felt that no TDS or lower TDS was deductible for any reason, they should have approached the payee to grant a certificate for no deduction of TDS or low deduction of TDS and since this was not done by the assessee or the payee, this contention is not acceptable that no TDS was deductible by the assessee company.
Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. Versus The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16 (1), Bangalore
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11113 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=51327&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Electrical installation is integral to the plant and machinery used for manufacturing steel, depreciation @ 15% i.e. the rate applicable to 'plant & machinery' is to be applied.
DCIT, CIRCLE 13 (1), NEW DELHI Versus M/s NALWA STEEL & POWER LIMITED
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11112 (ITAT-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=51328&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - 50% of salary paid to Director is no ground to made addition u/s 40A as director pays tax at the maximum marginal rates and hence there is no diversion of taxable income.
Hind Airlink P. Ltd. Versus Dy. CIT, Circle 12 (1), New Delhi
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11111 (ITAT-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=51329&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Section 88E of the Act does not envisage any distinction between total income computable under the normal provisions of the Act and that computable under Section 115JB so far as it relates to the granting of rebate against the amount of income-tax payable.
The ACIT 2 (1), Mumbai Versus Chokhani Securities Ltd.
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11110 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=51330&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Retrospective amendment cannot be a ground for reopening assessment beyond a period of four years.
GANESH HOUSING CORPORATION LTD Versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 4 AND 1
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11109 (HC-GUJARAT) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=66268&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Sec. 80HHC deduction not available upon Non-filing of audit report.
CIT. Vs. Kamaljeet Singh Aluwalia
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11108 (HC-RAJASTHAN)
-
HC - Writ against ruling of AAR dismissed - AAR had disposed of assessee’s application as having become infructuous in view of completion of assessment proceedings.
Eplanet Ventures Mauritius Ltd. vs. DIT
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11107 (HC-KARNATAKA)
-
HC - Sec 54F claim restricted for non-deposit of un-utilized consideration in capital gains account scheme in terms of Sec 54F(4).
Humayun Suleman Merchant Vs. Chief CIT
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11106 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section. 54F
-
HC - No condonation of delay of 660 days in re- filing of the appeals in absence of ‘sufficient cause’. Revenue's appeal dismissed.
DIT. Vs. JC Bamford Excavators Limited
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11105 (HC-DELHI)
-
HC - Reimbursement of retrenchment compensation by company to its subsidiary in respect of employees of transferred units for discharging contractual obligation is revenue in nature.
Wallace Flour Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. The C.I.T.
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11104 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
ITAT - An Indian company generating income by its SEZ units from export of data processing services to to an overseas company is eligible for Sec.10AA exemption.
DCIT/ ITO. Vs. Inter Globe Technology Quoteint Pvt. Ltd.
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11103 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section. 10AA
-
ITAT - No TDS on payment of bareboat hire charges in view of Protocol 7 of India-France DTAA.
International Seaport Dredging Ltd. vs. DCIT
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11087 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.