-
Whether an assessee is not liable for deduction of tax u/s 194C on the amounts of purchase of windmill machinery.
M/s SANKALP INTERNATIONAL Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3652 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · Income Tax - Sections 194C, 201, 201(1A)
-
Whether pro-rata rebate, given to the assessee on such cost of land, would be treated as a revenue receipt.
M/s K RAHEJA IT PARK (HYDERABAD) PVT LTD. Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3651 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
-
Whether translation services that involve translation of text from one language to another, fall within the purview of technical services as per Sec 9(1)(vii)
COSMIC GLOBAL LTD. Vs. ACIT
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3650 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Income Tax - Sections 9(1)(vii), 10A, 40(a)(i), 115JB, 143(2), 194J
-
Whether the consequential assessment order framed u/s 158BC is to be held to be illegal
GUNJAN GIRISHBHAI MEHTA Vs. DIRECTOR OF INVESTIGATION
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3649 (HC-GUJARAT) · Income Tax - Sections 132, 158BC, 158BD
-
Whether the authority needs to look into the application of the balance of income by the society to ascertain whether the same is being used towards educational purpose or some profit activity
SIMPKINS SCHOOL Vs. DGIT
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3648 (HC-ALLAHABAD) · Income Tax - Sections 10(22), 10(23C)(vi), 12AA
-
Whether deduction can be allowed on expenditure incurred on the maintenance of assets of its subsidiary
GUJARAT NARMADA VALLEY FERTILIERS COMPANY LTD. Vs. ACIT
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3647 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · Income Tax – Sections 32, 36(1)(iii)
-
Whether in the absence of any enquiry whatsoever by the AO and forming any opinion on the transaction except requiring the assessee to furnish details, the order passed by the AO is certainly erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue.
TAMILNADU INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. Vs. ACIT
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3646 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Income Tax - Sections 37, 143(3), 263
-
Whether the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for concealment is exigible in case the High Court has admitted the appeal filed by the assessee challenging the decision rendered by the Tribunal.
ACIT. Vs. RANI MUKERJI
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3645 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Income Tax - Sections 132, 158BFA(2), 271(1)(c)
-
Whether provisions of Sec 40(a)(ia) will automatically apply to such payments.
ITO. Vs. BIHANI COMMERCIAL
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3644 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · Income Tax - Sections 40(a)(ia), 143(3), 194C
-
Whether when the DRP fails to decide the issue on merit by considering the objections and submissions made by the assessee and remands the case to the AO to decide again, this amounts to illegal assumption of jurisdiction by the AO and the entire case requires to be set aside
Swiber Offshore Construction Pte Ltd. Vs. ADDL. DIT
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3643 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Income tax - Sections 44BB, 92CA(2A) & (2B), 131, 144C(8) & (13), 271(1)(b) & (c)
-
Whether when certain advisory services are rendered by the consultant from his own knowhow and experience, no imparting of skills takes place, and thus, any payment made in this regard is not royalty
GECF ASIA LTD. Vs. DIT
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3642 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Income Tax - Sections 9(1)(vii), 271(1)(c)
-
Whether ESOP can be taxed proportionately only for the period of actual stay in India, when the options were originally granted to the assessee while he was working in USA
CIT. Vs. ROBERT ARUTHER KEITZ
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3641 (HC-DELHI)
-
Whether when the project office of the assessee in India has the management control over the execution of the entire project, it can still claim that the income from certain activities undertaken outside India and also certain services provided by the non-resident cannot be attributed to the PE in India particularly when the assessee has submitted no details to the Revenue
CLOUGH ENGINEERING LTD. Vs ADIT
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3640 (ITAT-DELHI) · Income Tax - Sections 90(2), 92C(2), 92E, 94AB, 143(3), 144C(13), 234B, 234C, 271(1)(c)
-
S. 254(2B): Even though action of the CIT in canceling registration u/s 12AA(3) is illegal, costs cannot be awarded as the said action is in discharge of duty & not mala fide
Parkar Medical Foundation vs. DCIT
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3639 (ITAT-PUNE) · Sections. 254(2B), 12AA(3)
-
Whether the provisions of Sec 9(2) amended vide Finance Act, 2010, will apply in this case.
CIT. Vs. FAIZAN SHOES PVT LTD.
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3638 (HC-MADRAS) · Income tax - Sections 9(1)(i) (v), (vi) & (vii), 9(2), 37, 40(a)(i), 195
-
The TPO allowed the assessee working capital adjustment and on the basis of current year data, the TPO worked out the profit level indicator and proposed a transfer pricing adjustment against the assessee, under section 92CA.
HYUNDAI MOTORS INDIA ENGINEERING PVT LTD. Vs. DCIT
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3637 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · Income Tax - Sections 10A, 10B, 92CA, 133(6), 143(3), 144C(5), 234B, 234C
-
The Arithmetic Mean PLI was determined at 25.23%, taking the Operating Cost of Rs.155.62 crores, Hence, made an adjustment of Rs.15,20,07,732 u/s 92CA.
CAPITAL IQ INFORMATION SYSTEMS INDIA PVT LTD. Vs. Addl CIT
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3636 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · Income Tax - Sections 43B, 92CA(3), 143(3), 144(C)(5)
-
Whether allowing deduction of 1% towards risk profile uniformly can be adopted as a norm when profile of each assessee differs depending on its own business activity when compared to that of the comparable company
EXCELLENCE DATA RESEARCH PVT LTD. VS. ITO
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3635 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · Income Tax – Sections 10A, 92B, 92CA
-
Whether when the assessee does not cooperate in the assessment proceedings and the DVO's also adops arm-chair approach of simply issuing notice and making no independent inquiry, merely following the return on capital investment method the AO can make huge additions as unexplained investment.
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. RACHNA AGARWAL
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3634 (HC-DELHI) · Income Tax - Sections 69B, 132, 142(2A), 153A
-
Whether in case an opportunity has to be given in terms of SC's order to the Assessee, in that case, could it can be said that the Tribunal committed any error of law apparent on the face of the record or acted perversely in directing the AO to examine the relevant aspect, which was subject matter of the additional affidavit filed in the Supreme Court.
RECKITT PIRAMAL PVT LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3633 (HC-BOMBAY) · Income Tax - Section 263
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.