-
ITAT - CIT(Administration) authorizing Revenue’s appeal against its own order in capacity as CIT(A), not ‘judicial- propriety’ violation
ITO. Vs. Paras Builders
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6222 (ITAT-PUNE)
-
ITAT - Wheeling, scheduling and transmission charges to State power utility for using its distribution network to sell energy generated by assessee to end consumers is not FTS as it does not involve human intervention. No TDS u/s 194J
Auro Mira Biopower India (P.) Ltd. v. Income-tax Officer, TDS Ward I(5), Chennai
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6208 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=40335&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Where assessee did not disclose this income in his returns but during survey, a director of assessee company made a statement about materials and undisclosed income, addition u/s 69A against company was justified.
Raj Hans Towers (P.) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax-V
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6207 (HC-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=59327&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC- Where assessee sold goods to stockiest below MRP by treating the differential amount as managerial fees, question of invoking section 194J against assessee did not arise
Commissioner of Income-tax (TDS) v. Piramal Healthcare Ltd.
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6206 (HC-BOMBAY) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=59201&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - No reassessment on the basis of mere change of opinion by AO
Godrej Agrovet Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, 10(2)
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6205 (HC-BOMBAY) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=59304&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Where assessing Officer proceeded on basis of doubts as to genuineness of claim rather than some concrete material, disallowance of deduction under section 80-IC to manufacturer of LCD monitors was not justified.
Commissioner of Income-tax –XI v. Tej Pal Singh Kohli
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6204 (HC-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=59220&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - MAT Companies are liable to pay interest under sections 234B and 234C
Binani Cement Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle-XXVIII, Kolkata
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6203 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=40337&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - No section 80IA benefit on import license sale as there was no nexus with assessee’s business
Deccan Industrial Products vs ACIT
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6192 (HC-AP) · Section. 80IA
-
HC - Amount remitted by Indian branch to overseas group entities is not taxable as income unless RBI approval as required under FERA is obtained.
DIT. vs. Booz Allen and Hamilton (India) Ltd & Co
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6191 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
HC - Since non-competition agreement with the assessee(co-founder) is only to ward off any competition, therefore non-compete fee paid to assessee (co-founder) is not salary but a capital receipt.
G. Raveendran vs. CIT
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6189 (HC-MADRAS)
-
HC - Since software development centres added under each license were only extensions of the original undertaking, therefore they could not consequently be treated as separate undertakings. Sec 10A-benefit treating assessee’s 31 units as separate-undertakings is denied.
HCL Technologies vs ACIT
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6188 (HC-DELHI) · Section. 10A
-
SC - SLP Dismissed - HC had held that demerger scheme of Vodafone Essar Gujarat Ltd had bonafide commercial purpose
Department of Income Tax vs. Vodafone Essar Gujarat Ltd & Anr.
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6187 (SC)
-
ITAT - As per provisions of section 50C(2), the AO was not justified in adopting the value of the property as adopted by the “stamp valuation authority” without referring to the DVO for ascertaining the fair market value of the property.
Nikunjkumar H. Jariwala vs ITO
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6186 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · Section. 50C(2)
-
ITAT - Despite documentary evidence and broker’s confirmation, genuineness of penny stock transactions has to be determined on the basis of ‘preponderance of human probabilities’. If assessee is unable to explain ‘intriguing’ facts and circumstances, genuineness of transaction cannot be accepted
ITO vs. Shamim M. Bharwani
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6185 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 68
-
ITAT - Only credits received during the year can be assessed as unexplained cash credits. Credits of earlier years, even if unexplained, cannot be assessed
Rita Stephen Pinto vs. ITO (ITAT Mumbai)
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6184 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 68
-
ITAT - For penalty proceedings initiated on issues unrelated to assessment of income (such as for s. 269SS/ 269T & TDS defaults), time limit runs from date of initiation of penalty proceedings and not from date of CIT(A)'s order
ITO vs. JKD Capital & Finlease Ltd
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6183 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 275(1)(a)
-
ITAT - In a cross-objection, a new legal issue can be raised for the first time before the ITAT
ITO vs. Jasjit Singh (ITAT Delhi)
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6182 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
ITAT - S. 2(22)(e) is a deeming provision and has to be strictly construed. Assessee can discharge onus by pointing to 'preponderance of probability' and If explanation is not found to be false then, even if amounts are assessed as 'deemed dividend', penalty cannot be levied
ITO vs. Dipti Nikhil Modi
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6181 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Sections 2(22)(e), 271(1)(c)
-
ITAT - Amounts credited to Thyrocare Service Provider (collection centers for patient samples) by assessee (an accredited laboratory) is covered by provisions of Sec 194H.
ITO vs. Thyrocare Technologies Ltd.
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6165 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section. 194H
-
ITAT - Legal consequence of applicability of proviso to Sec 2(15) on registration of an entity as charitable institution - Seeks Larger-bench reference
Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6164 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section. 2(15), 12A
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.