-
A.O Zeal to protect interest of revenue has to be tempered with rules of fair play
Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax And Anr. Vs. Sony Mobile Communications (India) Pvt.Ltd.
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3380 (HC-DELHI)
-
HC upheld ITAT ruling reported in (2013) 7 TaxCorp (A.T.) 33465 (HYDERABAD). Tribunal has taken note of the Central Government notification and applied the definition as mentioned in clause (a) of Section 2(14)(iii) of the Act and found that the subject land is an agricultural land and it is not put to use for non-agricultural purpose. The fact finding of the learned Tribunal cannot be upset, unless it is perverse and there is no allegation of perversity in the matter.
Commissioner of Income Tax vs Kapil Chit Funds Pvt.Ltd
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3379 (HC-AP)
-
Assessee cannot be denied credit for TDS on the ground of Form 26AS mismatch because he is not at fault. Non-grant of TDS credit causes harassment, inconvenience & makes the assessee feel cheated. Dept to pay interest + costs of Rs. 25,000
Rakesh Kumar Gupta vs Union of India and another
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3378 (HC-ALLAHABAD)
-
Mere accrual of the consideration, to be received in the subsequent years does not defer the taxability of the capital gains.
Potla Nageswara Rao vs The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3377 (HC-AP)
-
S. 271(1)(c) - No specific direction to levy penalty u/s 271(1)(c) in assessment order
Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Triveni Engineering & Industries Ltd
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3376 (HC-ALLAHABAD)
-
Penalty applicable on MAT income. Addition resulted an increase in the income computed u/s 115JA as well. ITAT bench applied the proposition laid down in Nalwa Sons and held that, the penalty would be very much attracted where the addition leading to the concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars affect the computation of income under this Chapter as well.
DCIT Vs. Jubliant Enpro Pvt Ltd
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3375 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
S. 254: If a legal issue is raised (even for the first time) ITAT has the duty to deal with it and cannot remand it to lower authorities
Kansai Nerolac Paints Ltd vs DCIT
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3374 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
Sales promotion expenses by Pharmaceutical company – Free samples distributed to doctors / physician. ITAT bench, held that assessee claim not genuine, volume of transactions not good reason for failure. Burden on assessee to prove that expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively for purpose of business. Further no disallowance made in earlier years not ground to seek relief in subsequent year. ITAT bench remanded for examination afresh.
Merck Ltd. vs Deputy CIT
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3373 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
S. 54F - Exemption - Unutilized capital gain amount to be deposited in capital gain account scheme within the due date for filing the return of income u/s 139(1) and not under 139(4)
ITO vs Smt Rosamma Korah
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3372 (ITAT-COCHIN)
-
Second proviso to sec. 40(a)(ia) is effective retrospectively even if it was inserted by Finance Act, 2012 prospectively from April 1, 2013. No s. 40(a)(ia) disallowance for failure to deduct TDS on payment if payee has offered amount to tax. Second Proviso to s. 40(a)(ia) inserted by Finance Act 2013 w.e.f. 1.4.2013 should be treated as curative and to have retrospective effect from 1.4.2005
Rajeev Kumar Agarwal vs. ACIT
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3371 (ITAT-AGRA)
-
S. 2(47)(v): Transfer under a development agreement takes place on handing over possession. Capital gains are chargeable to tax even if no consideration is received by assessee
Potla Nageswara Rao vs. DCIT
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3370 (HC-AP) · Section 2(47)(v)
-
No concealment penalty if sec. 54F relief was denied since deal of acquiring house property couldn’t completed
Shri Venkatesh Murthy vs ITO
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3369 (HC-KARNATAKA)
-
Exemption u/s 54F cannot be denied on account of unapproved building plan
B Sivasubramanian vs ITO
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3368 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
-
POSSESSION DATE VIS-À-VIS AGREEMENT-SALE - 'Physical possession date' as 'transfer date' of land, not date of agreement. S. 53A of the TPA would be triggered only if the transferee “has performed” or is unconditionally willing and ready to perform his part of the contract.
Dr. Arvind S. Phadke vs. ACIT
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3367 (ITAT-PUNE)
-
Amended to S. 94(7) w.e.f. 1-4-2005 would apply prospectively w.e.f A.Y 2005-06, not be applicable to A.Y 2004-05
Era Software Systems P. Ltd vs DCIT
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3366 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
-
Expl to s. 73: Speculation loss on transactions in derivatives can be set off against the gains of delivery shares
CIT vs. Baljeet Securities Pvt. Ltd.
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3364 (HC-CALCUTTA) · Section. 73
-
A transfer of shares under a family arrangement is for a determinable “consideration” & is not “voluntary”. Consequently, the shares are not received under a “gift” & the transferee cannot claim benefit of cost, and holding period, of the transferor
ACIT vs. Bilakhia Holdings P. Ltd.
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3363 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
-
S. 194A - Co-operative bank need not deduct tax at source on interest paid to its members even if the amount exceeded Rs\- 10,000 p.a. It was held that 194A(3)(v) applies to a co-op bank and in view of the exemption, interest cannot be disallowed u\s 40(a)(ia).
Bagalkot District Central Co-op. Bank vs Joint Commissioner of Income-tax
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3362 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 194A(3), 40(a)9ia)
-
S. 14A disallowance cannot be made if the assessee has no tax-free income in the year
CIT vs. Lakhani Marketing
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3361 (HC-P&H) · Section. 14A
-
S. 271(1)(c)/ 271(1B): If, in the assessment order, AO directs initiation of penalty on specific issues but not on others, he is not entitled to levy penalty on the other issues
CIT vs. Triveni Engineering & Industries Ltd.
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3360 (HC-ALLAHABAD) · Sections. 271(1)(c), 271(1B)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.