-
Provisions of Sec. 271AAA of the Act are applicable for the cases where the search has been initiated or after 01.06.2007 but before 01.07.2012.
RAMESH KUMAR JAIN VERSUS ACIT CEN CIR, 1 (2), MUMBAI
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26955 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=90944&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Consideration received by the assessee for sale of software cannot be treated as royalty under the provision of section 9(1)(vi) of the Act as well as Article 12 of the India-Sweden DTAA
M/S. QLIKTECH INTERNATIONAL AB, C/O. QLIKTECH INDIA PVT. LTD. VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE – 2 (2), BENGALURU.
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26954 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=90945&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
There is no provision under the law for making the assessment on protective basis.
PRAVINKUMAR VALJIBHAI PUJARA HUF VERSUS I.T.O, WARD-2, PATAN.
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26951 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=90920&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Since SRSIPL is not a PE of the assessee, the profits earned from re insurance business cannot be brought to tax in India in terms of Article 7 of India Switzerland DTAA.
SWISS REINSURANCE COMPANY LTD VERSUS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) -RANGE 4 (2) (2), MUMBAI
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26950 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=90925&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Disallowance of interest expense on loan taken for purposes of business and against which interest income has been earned and offered to tax is unwarranted and the same qualifies to be allowed u/s.36(1)(iii)/S.37(l).
MASON INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD. VERSUS DCIT, CIRCLE 16 (2) NEW DELHI.
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26949 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=90927&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
There is no original assessment order in the case of the assessee and it was only an intimation under Section 143(1)of the Act, which cannot be treated to be an order.
M/S. THE KARNATAKA STATE CO-OPERATIVE APEX BANK LIMITED VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 3 (1), BANGALORE
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26948 (HC-KARNATAKA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=85236&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The assessment order was passed on 30.6.2017, and the clause, on the strength of which this reference was made to the TPO, stand omitted w.e.f. 1.4.2017. Therefore, no proceedings under section 263 should have been undertaken by the ld. Commissioner.
SHRI ASHISH SUBODCHANDRA SHAH VERSUS PR. CIT-3, AHMEDABAD
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26939 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=90892&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The assessment order is bad for invoking the jurisdiction u/s. 153C without proper satisfaction and also for not passing the draft assessment order as required u/s. 144C.
DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-19, NEW DELHI VERSUS NEWBURY OIL COMPANY LTD.
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26938 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=90897&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Sale proceeds are to be received in convertible foreign exchange in India for being eligible to be considered for the purposes of claiming deduction under section 10 A.
M/S TECNOTREE CONVERGENCE LTD. VERSUS THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-16 (2) , NEW DELHI.
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26937 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=90901&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Even based on the available materials, if the competent authority could able to identify any under-assessment, then also power under Section 147 shall be invoked by the competent authority.
M/S. THAMBBI MODERN SPINNING MILLS LTD. VERSUS THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXTHE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE (1), SALEM
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26936 (HC-MADRAS) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=85216&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Since the assessee company ceased to be in existence as on the date when the AO passed the order of assessment, assessment so framed is not sustainable in the eyes of law, being a nullity.
THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (LTU) , BENGALURU VERSUS M/S. DELL INTERNATIONAL SERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD., (NOW MERGED ENTITY M/S. PEROT SYSTEMS BUSINESS PROCESS SOLUTIONS INDIA PVT. LTD.) AND VICE - VERSA
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26927 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=90845&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
There are no segmental financials for marketing and the functions of the assessee are different from that of the comparable thus defaulting the FAR analysis.
AVAYA INDIA PVT. LTD. VERSUS ACIT, CIRCLE-1 (1) NEW DELHI
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26926 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=90846&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
An expenditure on account of annual exchange service charge is to be treated as revenue expenditure.
M/S. AANYA REAL ESTATE PVT. LTD. VERSUS DY. CIT 15 (1) (1) MUMBAI
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26925 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=90850&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Notice was issued for reopening of assessment within the period of limitation for the assessment year 2011-12.
DR. BHARANI R. PALUVAI, BRIDGET BHARANI VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON-CORPORATE WARD-11 (2), CHENNAI.
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26924 (HC-MADRAS) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=85198&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Once the books of account are found to be the representing true and correct affairs of business the Assessing Officer cannot tinker with the actual profit declared by the assessee.
DILIP KUMAR KHETAN PROPRIETOR DILIP YARN TRADERS VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER, AMBEDKARNAGAR
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26922 (ITAT-ALLAHABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=90817&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Any discrepancy in the statement of the partners is not going to change the condition prescribed u/s 40(b) (v) for allowing the claim of payment of remuneration to partners.
M/S. SHREE BHAGWAN THEATRES VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 1 (5) ALLAHABAD
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26921 (ITAT-ALLAHABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=90818&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
There is no merit in Revenue’s preceding arguments.
DY. CIT, CIRCLE 2 (2) HYDERABAD, ITO, WARD 2 (2), HYD VERSUS M/S GLOBAL ALUMINIUM PVT. LTD. SECUNDERABAD
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26920 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=90821&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Delegation of certain formalities regarding collection of booking application forms and money on behalf of the assessee would not cease the assessee company as being rendered as a developer of the project.
DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6, NEW DELHI VERSUS SAHARA INDIA SAHKARI AWAS SAMITI LTD. AND (VICE-VERSA)
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26919 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=90822&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The order u/s 263 passed by the ld. PCIT dwelled into the issue of re-computation of capital gains which is beyond the mandate of the limited scrutiny issued by the CBDT.
RAJANI VENKATA NAGA ANNAVARAPU NARAYANA VERSUS PCIT-20, NEW DELHI
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26904 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=90723&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
It is imperative on the part of the Assessing officer to show that the conditions specified in the first proviso to sec. 147 are complied with before initiating the reassessment proceedings.
SANJUKTA KUMARI SAHU, PROP. M/S. PRATIMA FILLING STATION VERSUS ITO, WARD-3 BERHAMPUR
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26903 (ITAT-CUTTACK) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=90727&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.