-
Factual situation relevant for allowing deduction under section 80-IB, not approved plan
CIT vs ABAD CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2746 (HC-KERALA) · 80IB(10)
-
Reassessment - Notice after four years - Conditions must be reflected in notice itself - Conditions that officer must be satisfied that there has been an escapement in assessment of income, which is chargeable to tax because of failure by assessee to file return under section 139. Notice and consequential steps not valid.
Tecumesh Products India Pvt. Ltd vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2745 (HC-AP) · Income-tax Section 147, 148
-
Criminal proceedings u/s 276B are independent of recovery proceedings under Sec 201(1) and 201(1A).
KINGFISHER AIRLINES LTD and Sri VIJAY MALLYA vs INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2744 (HC-KARNATAKA) · 276B
-
Criminal proceedings u/s 276B are independent of recovery proceedings under Sec 201(1) and 201(1A).
KINGFISHER AIRLINES LTD and Sri VIJAY MALLYA vs INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2743 (HC-KARNATAKA) · 276B
-
Second Proviso introduced by Finance Act, 2012 w.e.f 01-04-2013 to section 40(a)(ia) operates prospectively and not retrospectively.
Sea Food Park India Limited vs Dy.CIT
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2742 (ITAT-COCHIN) · Income Tax Section 40(a)(ia)
-
Second proviso to Sec 40(a)(ia) inserted w.e.f. April 1, 2013, being clarificatory in nature, should have retrospective application.
ITO vs Gaurimal Mahajan & Sons
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2741 (ITAT-PUNE) · Income Tax Section 40(a)(ia)
-
Hasty Recovery action may be treated as Contempt – Bombay HC to AO
A. T. KEARNEY INDIA PVT. LTD. versus INCOME TAX OFFICER
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2740 (HC-DELHI)
-
Benefit U/s. 54 / 54F on property jointly held by assessee with wife for Security Purposes
Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax Versus Suresh Verma
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2739 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
Sec. 54 Expression ‘a residential house’ cannot be interpreted as ‘a single residential unit’
Vittal Krishna Conjeevaram Vs. Income Tax Officer
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2738 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
-
Provison of retirement benefit based on service weightage of the employee.
Commissioner of Income tax vs PRICOL Limited
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2737 (HC-MADRAS) · Income Tax Section 40A(9), 40A(7)
-
If the expenditure were to be considered as capital expenditure in the hands of the owner, it has to be considered as capital expenditure in the hands of the tenant.
Rohit Bal Designs Pvt. Ltd. vs DCIT
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2736 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
No disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia), if it is establish that payee has paid tax and filed the ROI before the due date, the expenditure by the assessee shall be allowed in spite of the fact that tax has not been deducted on the same.
Chandrashekar Shivalingappa vs The Commissioner of Income Tax
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2735 (ITAT-PANAJI) · Section 40(a)(ia)
-
HC upheld the AO order directing Special audit under Section 142(2A)
DLF LTD AND ANOTHER vs ADDL. CIT
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2734 (HC-DELHI)
-
Blatant violation of the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 1976 - Donations to political parties - No reason why an entity such as a company would not fall within the ambit of the term “corporation” employed in the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 1976. A “corporation” incorporated in a foreign country or territory for the purpose of Section 2(e)(vi)(c) includes within its fold, companies incorporated outside the territory of India, such as Vedanta; which is incorporated in the United Kingdom.
ASSOCIATION FOR DEMOCRATIC REFORMS AND ANR vs UOI AND ORS
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2733 (HC-DELHI)
-
Exempt income —dividend and long-term capital gains — cannot be brought to tax in the hands of the trust even if the investments made by it do not meet the criteria prescribed under the Income Tax Act. The dividend income on shares and mutual funds and long term capital gain on sale of shares an exempt u/s 10(34), 10(35) and 10(38) respectively and cannot be brought to tax by applying section 11 and 13 of the Act.
Jamsetji Tata Trust vs Joint Director of Income Tax (Exemption)
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2732 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 10(34), 10(35) and 10(38)
-
Addition u/s 40(a)(ia) can be made only if there is a default in deducting tax at source u/s 194(c)(3). Assessee has received Form 15I and has also filed the requisite details of the sub-contractor in accordance with Rule 29D in Form 15J, even though belatedly, but that can be technically venial.
Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax vs Joaquim Alemao
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2731 (ITAT-PANAJI) · Section 40(a)(ia)
-
Additional depreciation can be allowed in the subsequent assessment year
Rittal India Pvt. Ltd vs ACIT (LTU)
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2730 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 32(1)(iia)
-
Third proviso to sub- section 3(c)(ii) of Section 80HHC - AO could not have reopened the assessment for the year 2000-01 on the basis of the retrospective amendment, when the retrospectivity has been struck down and the amendment having been held to be prospective, i.e. from the assessment year 2005-06, over six years later. If the Revenue felt aggrieved, it could have taken appropriate steps to rectify the order in accordance with law within the period prescribed.
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs JAYANITA
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2729 (HC-DELHI) · sub- section 3(c)(ii) of Section 80HHC
-
Booking rights in apartment becomes LTCG asset after 36 months from the date of buyer's agreement with Builders.
Gulshan Malik vs Commissioner of Income-tax
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2728 (HC-DELHI) · Section 2(47)(v) and (vi)
-
Assessee has furnished all the required details and that hence no penalty u/s 271(1)(c) can be levied on technical/legal disallowances u/s 14A or u/s 40(a)(ia). HC upheld ITAT order reported in (2013) 7 TaxCorp (A.T.) 33619 (DELHI)
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs GLOBAL ASSOCIATES
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2727 (HC-DELHI)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.