-
Deduction on account of compensation expenses - In a business, when a compensation is paid in respect of stock in trade for non-performance of a contract, the compensation paid is always considered as revenue expenditure. Merely an advance received from the buyers which were repaid with compensation. There is no transfer of title till a sale deed is executed or possession of the premise given in pursuance to part performance u/s 53A of the transfer of property Act. The compensation paid was for utilizing the funds made available by the buyers.
DCIT vs Vatika Town Ships Pvt. Ltd
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2526 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
S. 32(1) - Road constructed on Build-Operate-Transfer (“BOT”) terms is eligible for depreciation even though assessee is not the legal owner of the road
DCIT vs Swarna Tollway Pvt. Ltd
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2525 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · Income Tax Section 32(1)
-
Assessee has duly offered the amount admitted at time of search for taxation and paid tax with interest, penalty u/s 271AAA could not be sustained.
ACIT vs Shri A N Annamalaisamy (HUF)
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2524 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Income Tax Section 271AAA
-
Additions without proper opportunity of being heard not justified
M/s JKD Capital & Finlease Ltd. V/S. Income Tax Officer
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2523 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
Tax Audit Provision applies to Income From Partnership Firm
Sagar Dutta versus D.C.I.T.
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2522 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
-
S. 68 Merely transfer through bank account does not prove that the money is explained
Commissioner Of Income Tax V/s Smt. Prem Lata Sethi
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2521 (HC-ALLAHABAD)
-
Sections 28(v), 44AB, 271B - Partners' salary - Partnership deed - Penalty u/s 44AB can be attracted in case the professional income of the assessee received from partnership firm of Chartered Accountants is taxable under the head “income from business or profession” – Held, the assessee ought to have got her accounts audited under section 44AB of the Act.
Usha A. Narayanan vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2520 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · Income Tax Sections 28(v), 44AB, 271B
-
Penalty without issuing show cause notice cannot sustain – HC
ABDUL KARIMHAJI UMARBHAI RASULBHAI Versus STATE OF GUJARAT
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2519 (HC-GUJARAT)
-
Penalty u/s 45 (3A) of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 is not mandatory.
STATE OF GUJARAT Versus NARENDRAKUMAR REVACHAND KOTAK
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2518 (HC-GUJARAT)
-
Consideration for transfer of sales tax incentive taxable as revenue receipt
Sun-N-Sand Hotels Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The Dy CIT
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2517 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Tax Audit applicable to Partners on Income from Partnership Firm
Usha A. Narayanan Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2516 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
-
Interest received on FDR made from grant received not taxable if forms part of grant
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX II Versus SAR INFRACON PVT LTD.
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2515 (HC-GUJARAT)
-
Commercial property cannot be treated as a residential property for mere showing rent income as Income from House Property
Mr. I.Ifthiqar Ashiq Vs. Income Tax Officer
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2514 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
-
Provision for foreseeable loss made in accordance with guidelines of AS-7 allowable
The ACIT Vs. M/s. ITD Cementation India Ltd.
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2513 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
80P(2)(a)(vi) - “Collective disposal of Labour” - Income should have been generated by a Co-operative by utilizing the labour of the members in a collective manner, if it wants to avail deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(vi) of the Act. The employment opportunity generated to its members cannot be considered as “Collective disposal of labour”.
ITO vs Nileshwar Range Kallu Chethu & M/s. Hosdurg Range Kallu Chethu
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2512 (ITAT-COCHIN) · Income Tax Section 80P(2)(a)(vi)
-
Undisclosed income - there is rebuttable presumption under section 132(4A) that the documents belonged to the person and the contents being true and the assessee has not adduced any rebuttal evidence to show that the entries made in the diary/loose sheets were not income in the hands of the assessee.
Mahabir Prasad Rungta vs CIT(A) & Another Respondents
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2511 (HC-JHARKHAND) · Income Tax Section 132 & 158BC
-
Outstanding balances of creditors, the liabilities have been confirmed in the shape of affidavits. Hence, no substantial question of law would arise.
Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Jogendra Singh & Company
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2510 (HC-ALLAHABAD) · Income Tax Sections 44AB, 68, 144, 260A
-
ection 10(23C)(iiiae) - Hospital providing for maternity care has to deal with emergencies and on occasion, such hospitals have to provide emergent care which is often necessary to save the lives of the mother and the child. The views of CIT (A) and of Tribunal are not sustainable with reference to the provisions of sub clause (iiiae) of clause (23C) of Sec. 10.
Nehru Prasutika Aspatal Samiti vs Commissioner Of Income Tax
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2509 (HC-ALLAHABAD) · Income Tax Section 10(23C)(iiiae)
-
Business income” or as “Short term Capital gain” – Ld. CIT appears to be under the impression that if the gains are assessed as “Business income”, the assessee would be disclosing the value of “Closing stock” of immovable properties and it will increase the profit amount declared by the assessee.
Shri K.V. Balagangadharan Deepa vs DCIT
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2508 (ITAT-COCHIN)
-
Receipt basis or receipt basis - SC dismissed SLP filed by revenue against High court judgment reported in (2012) 6 TaxCorp (DT) 50352 (DELHI), however question of law is kept open.
CIT vs INDIAN SUGAR & GEN.INDUS.EXP.IMP.COR.LTD
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2507 (SC)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.