-
S. 43B: Issue of debentures to fund the interest liability does not amount to “actual payment” of the interest so as to qualify for deduction under Explanation 3C to Section 43-B
CIT vs. M. M. Aqua Technologies Ltd
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10770 (HC-DELHI) · Section 43B
-
S. 132(4): Admission of undisclosed income by assessee is not conclusive if no evidence is found to support the admission. A retraction, though belated, is valid. Failure to provide cross-examination to assessee of persons whose statements are relied up is fatal to the addition. CBDT Directive F.No.286/98/2013 IT (INV.II] dated 18/12/2014 prohibits additions on the basis of confession
CIT vs. Ramanbhai B Patel
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10769 (HC-GUJARAT) · Section 132(4)
-
ITAT - When management fees are paid under an agreement with AE and there is no finding that such services were also availed separately from third parties and booked as expenditure in P&L account, then determination of ALP at Nil is not acceptable.
AXA Technologies Shared Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10753 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
-
ITAT - As the notice u/s 143(2) has not been issued after the return has been filed, the consequential assessment stands annulled.
Anand Basavennappa Jyoti Vs. ITO
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10752 (ITAT-PANAJI) · Section. 143(2)
-
HC - Profit from sale of land owned by an educational trust cannot be treated as business income and is eligible for exemption u/s 11 r.w.s 2(15).
CIT. vs. Magunta Raghava Reddy Charitable Trust
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10751 (HC-MADRAS) · Section. 11
-
ITAT - CIT did not rely on Shah Committee report, but had identified the issues of under invoicing as AO did not examine the issue. Revision u/s 263 justified.
Trimurti Exports vs. PCIT
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10750 (ITAT-PANAJI) · Section. 263
-
ITAT - Interest allowable u/s 36(1)(iii) in relation to strategic investments made in group companies by an investment & finance company.
TATA Industries Ltd. vs. ITO
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10749 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section. 36(1)(iii)
-
ITAT - Revenue’s attempt of resorting to Explanation 1 to Sec. 147 by holding that “Explanation-1 to Sec.147 cannot be read in a manner so as to override Proviso to Sec.147.
Epcos India Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10748 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · Section. 147
-
HC - Expenditure towards structural repairs incurred by the tenant pursuant to tenancy agreement is capital in nature and not allowable u/s 30.
RPG Enterprises Ltd. vs. DCIT
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10747 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
ITAT - Suspicion cannot take the place of proof. Addition on account of expenses such as stamp duty, registration fees and other miscellaneous charges deleted.
Shri Ramesh D Murpana M/s. Dhanraj Jewellers Versus The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 19 (3), Mumbai
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10746 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=50403&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - On failure of the assessee to discharge its onus in respect of the credit received in the form of share capital from the parties, Addition u/s 68 confirmed.
M/s. M.K. Cycle Industries Pvt. Ltd. Versus ITO, Ward – 6 (1), New Delhi
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10745 (ITAT-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=50469&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Addition made by the authorities below were without any jurisdiction and were not in accordance with law and the facts and circumstances of the case. Addition in the hands of assessee’s husband on protective basis not justified.
Santosh Ahluwalia and MJS Ahluwalia Versus A.C.I.T., Circle-2, Jaipur
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10744 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=50491&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - when the very basis of initiation of penalty has changed then the initiation of penalty is no more sustainable in the eyes of law.
Madho Das Bangard Versus ACIT, Central Circle-1, Jaipur
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10704 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=50394&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - If the AO fails to make an enquiry on an issue, which in the given facts and circumstances of the case, calls for an enquiry then the order of the AO should held to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue.
M/s. SPML Infra Ltd. Versus Pr. C.I.T. -3, Kolkata
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10703 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=50396&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Treatment of emergency spares as revenue expenditure is in accordance with the revised Accounting Standard (AS) 2 and (AS) 10 would be in consonance with the mercantile system of accounting.
M/s. Ucal Machine Tools (P) Ltd. Versus Income Tax Officer, Company Ward-III (1), Chennai
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10702 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=50399&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - If in relation to any assessment year, no incriminating material is found, no addition or disallowance can be made in relation to that assessment year in exercise of powers under section 153A.
Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-4 Versus Saumya Construction Pvt. Ltd.
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10701 (HC-GUJARAT) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=65722&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Interest earned on Surplus funds of the 100% EOU has to be regarded as part of the “profit of the business of the undertaking eligible for deduction u/s 10B.
Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata Versus Hindustan Gum And Chemicals Ltd
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10700 (HC-CALCUTTA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=65720&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Reduction in the excess stock in the final order passed in the proceedings under Section 67of the KVAT Act, should have an impact on the assessment under the Income Tax Act also.
M/s. KOTTAKKAL WOOD COMPLEX Versus THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, KOZHIKODE
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10699 (HC-KERALA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=65739&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Quality of representation on behalf of the Revenue - Inconsistent stand being taken by the Revenue in different appeals raising identical issues - most matters are distributed amongst a few Advocates with the result we have occasions where a single Advocate appears in eight/nine matters a day. This indeed is expecting the moon from the panel Advocate.
The Commissioner of Income Tax-8 Versus M/s. TCL India Holdings Pvt. Ltd.
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10698 (HC-GUJARAT) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=65746&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - It is not impermissible for the AO to rely on report of investigation wing, as long as he has applied his mind to the materials on record and formed his own belief that on the basis of such material, it can be stated that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment.
HVK INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD Versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CENTRAL CIRCLE-3
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 10697 (HC-GUJARAT) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=65747&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.