-
S. 45(4) not applies if retiring partner takes only money for his share & if there is no distribution of capital assets among partners
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX V/s. M/s DYNAMIC ENTERPRISES
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 2306 (HC-KARNATAKA)
-
HC quashed the Order rejecting application made by taxpayer for grant of NIL withholding tax certificate u/s 197 and held that It is a very cryptic one rejecting the application made by the petitioner under Section 197 of the Act without giving details as to the outstanding demand and as to whether the petitioner’s case falls within the scope of section 197 and the rules made thereunder or not.
VODAFONE CELLULAR LIMITED vs ACIT (TDS)
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 2305 (HC-KARNATAKA) · Income Tax Section 197
-
AO can make fishing & roving enquiry U/s. 133(6) to detect tax evasion
Kathiroor Service Cooperative Bank Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Income Tax (CIB) & Ors.
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 2304 (SC)
-
TDS U/s. 194C applies on Bus rent paid by assessee school to transporter for carrying students
ACIT (TDS) Vs. Delhi Public School
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 2303 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
TDS deductible despite non claim of related expenditure
Agreenco Fibre Foam (P) Ltd. Vs. The Income Tax Officer (TDS), Kannur
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 2302 (ITAT-COCHIN)
-
Exemption u/s. 54EC cannot be denied to assessee due to deeming fiction created U/s. 50
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Versus ADITYA M EDISALES LTD.
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 2301 (HC-GUJARAT)
-
S. 14A Mere incorporation &receipt of share application money cannot be said to be commencement of business
Holcim (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT (OSD) Cir. 12(1)
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 2300 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
CBI has no legal existence, Creation of CBI illegal – HC
Sh Navendra Kumar Versus Union of India & Another Respondents
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 2299 (HC-GAUHATI)
-
Transfer fee & TDR premium not exempt on the ground of mutuality for Co-op Hsg Societies
Hatkesh Co.op. Hsg. Soc. Ltd. Vs. Asst. CIT, Circle 21(1)
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 2298 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Taxation of fees for technical services u/s 9(1)(vii) & disallowance u/s 40(a)(i) for failure to deduct TDS
Metro & Metro Vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 2297 (ITAT-AGRA)
-
S. 195 TDS to be withhold only on share of Non-resident Seller in co-owned property
Shri R. Prakash, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, International Taxation
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 2296 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
-
Rule 46A – Additional Evidences cannot be accepted without allowing AO a reasonable opportunity to examine and rebut the said evidences
ITO Vs. Mrs. Anvita Abbi
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 2295 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
Maternity is a natural process and could not be termed as illness or disease
D.C.I.T. vs. Nehru Prasutika Asptal Samiti
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 2294 (ITAT-AGRA)
-
Immunity From Penalty U/s. 271(1)(c) Available For Belated Returns
Income Tax Officer (Central) v/s. Mr. Gope M. Rochlani
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 2293 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Judgment of jurisdictional High Court not binding if there is a later contrary judgment of non-jurisdictional HC
Shri Prakash Vasantbhai Golwala Vs. The ACIT Circle-5, Surat
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 2292 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
-
Foreign exchange forward contract Gain/Loss to Assessee engaged in exports business : Speculative or Business?
London Star Diamond Company (I) P. Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Rg 5(2)
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 2291 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
When the amounts in the Savings Bank account of the appellant remained unexplained, definitely the AO was justified in treating as unexplained money under Section 69A.
K V MATHEW vs ITO
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 2290 (HC-KERALA) · Income Tax Section 69A
-
Disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia) does not attract penalty u/s. 271(1)(c). Making an incorrect claim in law does not tantamount to furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. Levy of penalty is not justified merely because the assessee has claimed certain expenditure that expenditure is not eligible in view of the provisions of section 40 (a)(ia) of the Act and for that reason, expenditure is disallowed.
DCIT vs Roop Singh Bagga
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 2289 (ITAT-INDORE) · Income Tax Section 271(1)(c), 40(a)(ia)
-
ITAT rejects Merilyn principle, Payments to Holding Co for services without TDS disallowed Sec.40(a)(ia) disallowance for nondeduction of tax at source applies not only to amounts payable as on March 31 but also to amounts paid during the year; Rejects assessee's reliance on SB ruling in Merylin Shipping; Followed HC rulings in Crescent Export and Sikandarkhan Tunvar; Quashed assessee’s contention that expenditure for which the disallowance has been made was actual reimbursement; Various services and infrastructure facility provided by holding company under a composite agreement amounts to works contracts, liable for TDS u/s 194C; Rejects assessee's contention that work refers to production of something tangible.
STCI Commodities Limited vs ACIT
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 2288 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Income Tax Section 40(a)(ia)
-
Section 244A(1)(b) explanation that the department cannot dispute that the assessee is entitled to interest on refund of all payments of tax in excess of actual tax found due. It is found that if any self-assessed tax paid and adjusted against the demand was later found to be refunded, then the assessee will be entitled to get interest under Section 244A (1) (b) of the Act on such excess tax adjusted against demand.
ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs M/S. KERALA TRANSPORT Co.
(2013) TaxCorp(LJ) 2287 (HC-KERALA) · Income Tax Section 244A(1)(b)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.