-
There is no dispute that the assessee has received incentives from the lessors. It is also not in dispute that the assessee has amortized in the profit and loss account only ₹ 34,05,526/- and balance has been spread over the entire lease period.
M/S INDITEX TRENT RETAIL INDIA PVT. LTD. VERSUS THE ADDL. C.I.T SPECIAL RANGE - 4 NEW DELHI AND (VICE-VERSA)
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28568 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=96022&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Show cause notice dated 25th March 2010 as well as order dated 10th December 2013 have to be quashed and set aside.
INGRAM MICRO INC. VERSUS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) – TDS – 3, THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NEW DELHI
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28567 (HC-BOMBAY) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=86735&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Explanations A(a)(ii)/A(b) to the notifications dated March 31, 2021 and April 27, 2021 are declared to be ultra vires the Relaxation Act, 2020 and are, therefore, bad in law and null void.
REALLY DEALCOMM PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28566 (HC-CALCUTTA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=86738&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
DDIT is directed to inform the Immigration Bureau once the aforesaid conditions are met and to return the surety to the Assessee on his return to India.
Jayant Nanda Vs UNION OF INDIA
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28565 (HC-DELHI)
-
Technical services rendered by Assessee’s employees were duly offered to tax and thus, there is no Supervisory PE of the Assessee.
FCC Co. Ltd Vs ACIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28564 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
The expression sufficient cause employed by the legislature in the Limitation Act is adequately elastic to enable the Courts to apply the law in a meaningful manner which sub-serves the ends of justice-that being the life purpose for the existence of the institution of Courts.
Surendra Singh Vs DCIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28563 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
Though section 10A, as amended, is a provision for deduction, the stage of deduction would be while computing the gross total income of the eligible undertaking under Chapter IV of the Act and not at the stage of computation of the total income under Chapter VI.
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI VERSUS AMNET SYSTEMS PVT LTD.
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28562 (HC-MADRAS) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=86729&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The assessee cannot be escaped from the penalty provisions in a situation where the income was determined on estimated basis.
M/S. MORAKHIA COPPER AND ALLOYS PVT. LTD. VERSUS A.C.I.T., TAX, CIRCLE-2 (1) (2) , AHMEDABAD.
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28561 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=95982&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
If the assessee trust is formed with both religious and charitable objects in terms of section 13(1)(b), its claim for registration u/s 12AA cannot be denied and it can only denied in case when such objects are carried out for the benefit of a particular religious community or caste.
ACIT (E) , CIRCLE 1 (1) , NEW DELHI VERSUS DIVYA JYOTI JAGRATI SANSTHAN
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28560 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=95985&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Keeping in view the entire facts of the case, we allow the appeal of the assesse.
ABHAY KUMAR MITTAL VERSUS DCIT, CIRCLE-72 (1) , NEW DELHI
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28559 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=95986&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Although the apparent must be considered as real, but, if there are reasons to believe that the apparent is not real, as is the case under consideration as well, then the apparent should be ignored to unearth the harsh reality.
M/S. KASTURI RASHI DEVELOPERS VERSUS ITO, WARD-5 (3) , PUNE
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28558 (ITAT-PUNE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=95991&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
To maintain the investment portfolio the assessee has incurred expenses therefore, we are of the view that it is quite reasonable to allow 50% of these expenses.
HOTEL SKYLINE PVT. LTD. VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -1 (1) , BHARUCH
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28557 (ITAT-SURAT) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=95993&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Under Section 195, the payer is responsible for deduction of tax at source and as such no liability under Section 195 could be fastened on the Assessee, who was only a guarantor of the share purchase transaction.
Ingram Micro Inc. Vs The Income Tax Officer
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28556 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
The reason for rejecting the review application to be untenable in law since the conviction of the Assessee was set aside by the Special Judge prior to rejection of review application.
Jai Singh Goel Vs CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(CENTRAL) & ANR.
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28555 (HC-DELHI)
-
Interest income need not be necessarily business income in nature for establishing the effective connection with the PE because that would render provision contained in paragraph 4 of Article XI redundant.
Baker Hughes Singapore Pte Vs ACIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28554 (ITAT-DEHRADUN)
-
The fees were inevitable and were paid to determine the FSI available in order to determine the area to be transferred to MCGM and MHADA in accordance with the development control regulation without which it would not have been possible to transfer the development rights.
Standard Industries Limited Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28553 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
In view of the language used in Section 57(ii), depreciation is allowable from rental income from letting of machinery, plant and furniture whereas in the instant case income received is interest from investment of surplus, and holds depreciation to be inadmissible.
Sports Authority of Gujarat Vs DCIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28552 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
-
Royalty from BREW operator agreement is not chargeable to tax in the hands of the assessee and also the revenue received under the test tools agreement. We direct the Assessing Officer to delete the impugned additions.
QUALCOM TECHNOLOGIES INC. VERSUS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28551 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=94323&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Unless, there is change in law or facts and circumstances of the case, contrary view cannot be taken on the issue that has attained finality in earlier assessment years and the fundamental aspect permeates in different years.
ACIT-2 (2) (1) MUMBAI VERSUS JAYANT DATTATRAY MHAISKAR
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28550 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=95970&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in upholding the addition.
THE JANALAXMI CO-OP. BANK LTD. VERSUS ACIT, CIRCLE – 1, NASHIK
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28549 (ITAT-PUNE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=95974&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.