-
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)
-
Presence of commercial motive cannot be a ground to cancel registration u/s. 12AA(3) of the Act. It was not a necessary element for a charitable purpose that it should be providing something for nothing or for less than what it costs or for less than the ordinary price. So long as the income of the trust is applied for charitable purpose, there can be no question of any tax liability on the assessee.
Vivekanand General Hospital vs Commissioner of Income Tax
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2646 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Income Tax Section 12AA
-
Wind energy generators used in the process of manufacture of wind mills. Generator sets being one such block of asset falling for consideration under Clause 10A of the depreciation table, this alone would qualify for the rate as prescribed under 'renewal energy devices', i.e., 100% depreciation. As far as other machineries are concerned viz., drilling machines, boring machines, boring machine for foundation work and lathe machine, as rightly pointed out by the Assessing Officer, the same would qualify for depreciation at 25% and not at 100% as claimed by the assess.
Commissioner of Income Tax vs M/s. TTG Industries Ltd
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2645 (HC-MADRAS) · Income Tax Section 32 & Rule 5 of the Income-tax Rules
-
S. 10A/ 10B: Interest income out of surplus funds in Banks and sister concerns & EEFC account is eligible for exemption
CIT vs Motorola India Electronics (P) Ltd
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2644 (HC-KARNATAKA) · Income Tax Section 10A, 10B
-
Distinction between “hire purchase transactions” and “loan transactions” explained
CIT vs Commercial Motors Finance Ltd. Kanpur
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2643 (HC-ALLAHABAD)
-
S. 271(1)(c) - No doubt, in the case of the Assessee, the claim of the Assessee in respect of Depreciation on Goodwill has been disallowed and confirmed by the Tribunal as well as by the Hon'ble High Court but since now the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court is before us in the case (2012) 6 TaxCorp (DT) 52548 (SC), it cannot be said that the claim of the Assessee was not bona fide. The disallowance of claim of depreciation in case of the Assessee will not make the claim of the Assessee not to be bona fide one. The bona fide of the claim of the Assessee is itself proved by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Under these facts it cannot be said that the Assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of income so far it relates to the claim of depreciation on goodwill in each of the A.Ys. The claim u/s 80IA/80IB has been made by the Assessee as per computation and for making the claim, the Assessee has to submit the audited report which is duly certified by the C.A. All the particulars in respect of the claim are to be furnished. It is not the case of the Revenue that the Assessee has not furnished all the particulars of the claim. If the Assessee has made the claim on the basis of the opinion and certificate of an expert, in our opinion, it cannot be said that the Assessee had concealed the particulars of income or furnished inaccurate particulars of income. We, accordingly, dismiss all the appeals filed by the Revenue.
ACIT vs Borkar Packaging Pvt. Ltd
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2642 (ITAT-PANAJI) · Income Tax Section 271(1)(c)
-
Notice issued u/s. 148 of the Act for Assessment Year 2004-05 and 2005-06 is barred by limitation.
ACIT vs Apex Packing Products(P) Ltd
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2641 (ITAT-PANAJI)
-
When assessee has earned the dividend income from the company, some expenditure might have incurred and it is the duty of the AO to make enquiry in respect of expenditure incurred for earning the dividend income. This is the case whether the AO has made the assessment without proper enquiry. The AO unlike the Civil Court which is neutral to give a decision on the basis of evidence produced before him. But AO is not only adjudicator but also an investigator. The AO cannot remain passive on the facts of a return which is apparently in order but calls for further enquiry. In this case it was the duty of the AO to make enquiry, whether assessee has incurred any expenditure to earn the dividend from the company at Rs. 54,620.50 or not. The AO was failed to make such enquiry, the order is erroneous and prejudicial to revenue. The assessment is restored to the AO to make a further enquiry after giving due opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
Haroon Ebrahim vs CIT
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 2640 (ITAT-PANAJI)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.