-
ITAT - Legal expenses incurred on feasibility report for acquisition of brand which was in existing line of assessee's business and same was in nature of consultancy, was to be treated as revenue in nature
Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax v. Pan India Food Solutions (P.) Ltd.
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5317 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=37448&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Conversion of heena leaves into herbal heena powder by process of mixing and grinding amounts to manufacture and therefore the profits derived from such activity are liable for deduction under section 80-IB
Commissioner of Income-tax, Shimla v. Indus Cosmeceuticals
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5315 (HC-HP) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=58683&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Where there is a partial compliance, deduction under section 80-IB(10) is allowable on pro rata basis where both commercial and residential houses have been built
Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax v. Rajarathnam Construction (P.) Ltd.
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5314 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=37371&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
SC - Whether the competent authority had formed the opinion on the basis of any acceptable material or not, as is clear as crystal, the High Court has not even remotely tried to see the reasons or scrutinized file before quashing search and seizure order of revenue, matter was to be remanded back
Union of India v. Agarwal Iron Industries
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5313 (SC) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=58652&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - If, on facts, it can be established that adoption of a certain comparable would lead to skewed results or that the financial data of a particular comparable is otherwise devoid of credibility, such comparables would deserve to be excluded from the list of comparables even if such an exercise involved examination of data of the comparables for more than one financial year.
Cummins Turbo Technologies Ltd. v. Deputy Director of Income-tax (International Taxation)-I, Pune
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5312 (ITAT-PUNE) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenINTL.aspx?ID=7509&Category=INTLDecisions&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Considering the fact that in respect of the earlier assessement years, in respect of the identical transaction conditional order of stay has been granted, assessee was to be granted stay on demand during relevant assessment years on identical issue
Vodafone Cellular Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) -II, Coimbatore
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5311 (HC-MADRAS) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=58687&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Condition precedent for passing an order in block assessment is undisclosed income being recovered in a search proceedings, thus unaccounted stock found prior to search could not be subject matter of block assessment proceedings
Commissioner of Income-tax, Mangalore v. B. Sudheer Baliga
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5310 (HC-KARNATAKA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=60342&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Partnership is not a legal entity in strict sense and in all the movable and immovable assets which are held by the partnership, there is an interest of every partner though not specifically defined in terms of their shares. Capital gains chargeable in hands of the firm on sale of hospital building contributed by partners to the firm as capital contribution & entitled to Sec.54EC benefit
Chakrabarty Medical Centre vs. Tax Recovery Officer
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5309 (ITAT-PUNE) · Section 54EC
-
ITAT - The work of broadcasting/telecasting including production of programme or such broadcasting or telecasting falls under the definition of “work” as provided under clause (iv) of the Explanation to section 194C as such placement fee subject to TDS u/s 194C
ACIT vs. UTV Entertainment Television Limited
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5308 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 194C
-
S. 234E: The late filing of TDS returns by the deductor causes inconvenience to everyone and s. 234E levies a fee to regularize the said late filing. The fee is not in the guise of a tax nor is it onerous. The levy is constitutionally valid
Rashmikant Kundalia vs. UOI
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5307 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 234E
-
ITAT - Determination of ALP of royalty at 2% cannot be supported, hence, deserves to be struck down. Moreover, theory of benefit test applied by TPO also falls flat considering the fact that TPO does not question the necessity of paying royalty but only objects to the quantum.
R.A.K. Ceramics India Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5292 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
-
ITAT - CIT, while granting registration or renewal, can only look at the nature of activities and is not concerned with potential violation of s. 11(5) or s. 13. Registration cannot be denied on ground that activities have not commenced
Kul Foundation vs. CIT
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5291 (ITAT-PUNE) · Sections 12AA, 80G(5)
-
ITAT - Property introduced by a partner into firm becomes the asset of the firm even if there is no registered deed. Though the asset is held by the firm as a depreciable asset and though the investment in s. 54EC bonds is made in the names of the partners, the firm is eligible for s. 54EC exemption
M/s. Chakrabarty Medical Centre vs. TRO
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5290 (ITAT-PUNE) · Section 54EC
-
HC - Sec 269SS not attracted for advances given by partners to the partnership firm as not distinct entities; No Sec 271D penalty.
CIT. vs. Muthoot Financiers
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5289 (HC-DELHI) · Sections. 269-SS, 271D
-
HC - Royalty payments under “know-how agreement” for 10yrs for use of technology license is allowable revenue expenditure u/s 37(1) as there was no enduring-benefit. In the automobile industry, technology upgradation is constant and rapid.
CIT vs. Hero Honda Motors Limited
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5287 (HC-DELHI)
-
SC - SLP Dismissed. Sec 80IB cannot be interpreted so as to render the provisions of Sec 115JB nugatory or otiose or ineffective or does not achieve the purpose for which it is enacted.
Sankhla Polymers (P)Ltd vs. ITO
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5286 (SC) · Section. 80IB
-
HC - In case of doubt or ambiguity question of rectification u/s 154 does not arise.
CIT. vs. Palanquin Investments P Ltd.
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5285 (HC-MADRAS) · Section. 154, 94(8)
-
ITAT - Section 54F benefit is not available on investment made in a Coffee estate, as entire coffee estate was not meant for residence as "residence" means a dwelling place. Exemption only to value of investment relating to the Bungalow and land appurtenant thereto on the coffee estate.
A. G. Hoover vs ACIT
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5284 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section. 54F
-
HC - Section 80IB(10) benefit admissible as “built-up area” includes car park for AY 2004-05.
CIT. vs. Subba Reddy
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5283 (HC-MADRAS)
-
ITAT - Since assessee has not raised any objection on the notice u/s.143(2) before AO therefore S.292BB is clearly applicable. It can be invalid only if challenged before AO.
L&T Infocity Limited vs. DCIT
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 5282 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · Section. 143(2)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.