-
The circular issued by the department cannot amend the statutory provision and therefore Rule 68B
ITO vs K MAHIN KALLATRA
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2666 (HC-KERALA)
-
For the purpose of claiming 54F, Commercial property cannot be treated as a residential property for the reason that rental income from it is shown as “Income from House Property”
Mr I Ifthiqar Ashiq vs Income Tax Officer
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2665 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Income Tax Section 54F
-
Section 53A of TPA, 2(47)(v) r.w.s 45 of IT ACT, 1961- Capital gains is to be computed at the time when the transfer takes place
CIT vs COCHIN STOCK EXCHANGES LIMITED
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2664 (HC-KERALA) · Section 53A of TPA, 2(47)(v) r.w.s 45 of IT ACT, 1961
-
Exemption u/s 54F allowable if construction had commenced before the sale of the shares
CIT vs BHARTI MISHRA
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2663 (HC-DELHI) · Income Tax Section 54F
-
Section 40(a)(ia) applies only to those amount which remains payable by the end of the previous year, in respect of payments already made section 40(a)(ia) is not attracted.
Vivil Exports P. Ltd. vs Income Tax Officer
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2662 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Income Tax Section 40(a)(ia)
-
HC quash the majority view of the Income Tax Settlement Commission (ITSC) granting immunity to the assessee from penalty and prosecution
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2661 (HC-DELHI)
-
The explanation to sub-section (2A) of Section 10 does not require any striking down as sought by the petitioner. That section has been interpreted in this order having regard to the object of the amendment and the principles of Partnership Law.
VIDYA INVESTMENT AND TRADING COMPANY PVT LTD vs UOI & Ars
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2660 (HC-KARNATAKA) · Income Tax Section 10(2A), sub-sections (34), (35) and (38) of Section 10
-
Amendment made to provisions of section 2(ea) by Finance Act, 2013 with retrospective effect from 1-4-1993 - Where CWT(A) had no occasion to examine impact of amendment to section 2(ea) with retrospective effect which was claimed to have kept land in question out of purview of wealth tax, matter was to be remanded
Smt K Swarnalatha vs Deputy Commissioner of Wealth-tax
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2659 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · Income Tax Section 2(ea)
-
ITAT upheld Ld. CIT(A) order granting S. 10B deduction even though approval was granted by STPI and not by Board appointed by Central Government.
ITO vs Cat Labs Pvt. Ltd
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2658 (ITAT-PUNE) · Income Tax Section 10B
-
No Adjournment for absence of advocates without reasonable cause –HC
M/s Thermax Babcock & Wilcox Ltd. Versus The Commissioner of Income Tax.
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2657 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
There is no prohibition u/s 80P not to allow deduction to such co-operative societies in respect of business relating to its members. However ITAT , the Assessee did not file copy of its bye-laws before us; neither are the provisions of Sec. 17 of The Karnataka State Co-operative Societies Act, 1959. ITAT restore this issue to the file of the AO with the direction that the AO shall look into the rules and bye-laws of the Assessee co-operative society and in case the AO finds that the bye-laws did not permit admission of any other co-operative society, it be treated that the Assessee complies with all the three conditions for becoming a primary co-operative bank. In case the bye-laws permit for the admission of any other co-operative society as a member, the Assessee will not be not treated as a co-operative bank and the provisions of Sec. 80P(4) will not apply to the Assessee. The Assessee will be entitled in that case, in our opinion, for the deduction as stipulated u/s 80P(1) r.w.s. 80P(2)(a)(i).
Rani Channamma Mahila Urban Co-operative Credit Society Ltd vs Income Tax Officer
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2656 (ITAT-PANAJI) · Income Tax Section 80P(2)(a)(i), 80P(4)
-
When the status of the assessee is a Co-operative society and is not a Co-operative bank, the order passed by the Assessing Authority extending the benefit of exemption from payment of tax under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act is correct. The Revisional Authority was not justified in invoking his power under Section 263.
CIT vs SRI BILURU GURUBASAVA PATTINA SAHAKARI SANGHA NIYAMITHA BAGALKOT
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2655 (HC-KARNATAKA) · Income Tax Section 80P(2)(a)(i), 80P(4), 263
-
Excessive delay in delivery of judgments may shaken the confidence of litigant in Judiciary
Emco Limited versus The Union of India and others
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2654 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
S. 80-IB(10) – Limit on extent of commercial area applies only to projects approved after 01.04.2005
Income Tax Officer Vs. M/s Yash Developers
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2653 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Addition u/s 68 can be made on account of share applicants’ lack of resources
ONASSIS AXLES PRIVATE LIMITED versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2652 (HC-DELHI)
-
Expenditure on rural development - Providing facilities in villages – discharging corporate social responsibility - allowable as deduction. Further directed AO to allow disallowance of various expenditure incurred during the course of business - decided in favour of the assessee.
Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. vs DCIT
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2651 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Application u/s 245R(2) - Mere filing of return does not mean that the question is already pending before the Income-tax authority. Question cannot be said to be already pending before the Income-tax Authority irrespective of the notice u/s 143(2) being issued subsequently within the prescribed time limit.
LS Cable & System Limited, In re
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2650 (AAR)
-
Credit for TDS year can be allowed in subsequent year
CIT vs Abbott Agency
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2649 (HC-P&H)
-
Benefit u/s 10A can be extended even to the existing units, if they have fulfilled the condition u/s 10A(2)(a)(ii) and 10A(2)(a)(iii) of the Act and the requirement of setting up of a new STP unit does not arise. There is no transfer of business as contemplated under Section 45(1) of the Act and only the partnership firm was converted into a company and all the partners of the firm have become the shareholders of the company. All the assets and liabilities were transferred to the Company. None of the outsiders were inducted as shareholders. Circular No.1/2005 is in the context of Section 10B, the ratio of the circular equally applies to Section 10A also. The benefit under Section 10A would also be available even when an existing unit gets converted into STP unit. Hence, it is not open to the Assessing Officer to contend that no new undertaking came into being after approval of STPI.
CIT vs FORESEE INFORMATION SYSTEMS (P) LTD
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2648 (HC-KARNATAKA) · Income Tax Section 10A
-
Word and Phrases – “derived from” – Section 80HH - The scrap generated from the three units has direct and immediate nexus with the industrial undertaking since the said scrap has been generated from the manufacturing process itself. Thus, we are of the view that the Commissioner as well as the Tribunal has committed no error in allowing the benefit of Section 80-HH to the assessee on the aforesaid income of Rs. 63 lakhs and odd.
CIT vs Modi Xerox Ltd
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2647 (HC-ALLAHABAD)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.