-
ITAT - Assessing Officer after issuing the notice u/s 148 for AY 2009-10 within the limitation period on 31.03.2016, had got jurisdiction to re-open the assessment for AY 2009-10 and after having served the assessee notice u/s 148 on 22.09.2016 has passed the assessment order within the prescribed time u/s. 153(2) of the Act on 11.12.2017, so these actions of Assessing Officer are legal and valid in the eyes of law.
DCIT, CENTRAL CIR-1 (1) , KOLKATA VERSUS M/S. ALEMBIC MERCHANTS PVT. LTD
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24667 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=86838&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - AO is directed to adopt GP rate of 16% on purchases of ₹ 3,05,34,283/- from the six creditors which comes to ₹ 48,85,485/- as against the addition of the entire amount payable to the six parties u/s 68.
MANJU SHARMA VERSUS ITO, WARD-45 (5) , NEW DELHI.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24666 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=86840&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Section 72(1)(i) mandate set off of business loss with business income of a subsequent year. It is a statutory compulsion. It does not give any option to assessee to set off or not to set off. In other words, whether or not the assessee has set off the losses in the return of income, the income tax authorities are required to give effect to section 72(1)(i) and set off such losses.
M/s.Mistral Solutions Pvt.Ltd. Vs The Dy.Commissioner of Income-tax
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24665 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 72
-
In the present case the assets were acquired in India, therefore, the conditions of making actual repayment of foreign currency loan as stipulated under Sec.43A is not a condition for making necessary adjustment in the actual cost of the asset, thus general principles of law would be applicable.
Aesseal India Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24664 (ITAT-PUNE)
-
ITAT - The expression 'expenditure' also includes a loss and therefore, issuance of shares at a discount where the assessee absorbs the difference between the price at which it is issued and the market value of the shares would also be expenditure incurred for the purposes of Section 37(1).
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX LTU BANGALORE., THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX LTU, BANGALORE VERSUS M/S. BIOCON LTD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24663 (HC-KARNATAKA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83739&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Where assessee had sufficient interest free funds available with it which can take care of investment made in exempt income yielding assets, no disallowance of interest expenditure under Rule 8D(2)(ii) can be made.
M/S PRINT SERVICES VERSUS THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME, CIRCLE-21 (2) (5) , MUMBAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24662 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=86805&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
the investment made by the assessee company in other sister concerns rather we can say subsidiary companies are meant to be for commercial expediency and commercial necessity.
GTL LTD. VERSUS ACIT, LTU-2, MUMBAI AND (VICE-VERSA)
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24661 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=86807&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Addition made by the AO on account of profit allegedly earned by the assessee on undisclosed turnover was directly related to the ground on which the case of the assessee was selected for limited scrutiny.
SUKUMAR MONDAL VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-47 (4), KOLKATA
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24660 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=86808&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Issue of rejection of books of account based on difference in power consumption of the relevant previous year turning act to be excessive than the so called tolerable limit of 15 % is no more res-intgra.
M/S KIRPALU STRIPS VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, MANDI GOBINDGARH AND INCOME TAX OFFICER VERSUS M/S KIRPALU STRIPS, C/O- RADHEY SHYAM TRADERS
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24659 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=86810&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
When the AO has not applied his mind at the time of initiation of penalty proceedings by satisfying himself if it is a case of “concealment of income” or “furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income” then the entire penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) are vitiated and bad in law.
M/S. CHEGG INDIA (P) LTD. VERSUS ACIT, CIRCLE 6 (1), NEW DELHI.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24658 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=86819&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Forced abandonment of property would not tantamount to transfer u/s 45 and even if it did result in transfer, section 45 provides that capital gains is chargeable in the year in which the transfer took place.
Continental Construction Ltd Vs ACIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24657 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
The maximum amount that the assessee can be directed to deposit would be 20% of the remaining demand.
TATA TELESERVICES LIMITED Vs THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24646 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
In the instant case AS-9 applies as financial service rendered by the assessee, which results in revenue, which in turn has to be taken into account having regard to incidence of costs relating to service.
Medi Assist (India) Tpa Pvt. Ltd Vs CIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24641 (HC-KARNATAKA)
-
Requirements of CBDT circular No.7/2016 are duly satisfied in the case of the assessee and hence, once the amount has been offered to tax by its members, the assessee could not be saddled with the liability to pay tax in respect of the same amount.
THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5 Vs M/S BACKBONE PROJECTS LTD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24640 (SC)
-
Irrespective of the nature of training expenses, assessee's business of transmitting data of qualified personnel, electronically, from its database would fall under human resource services as per CBDT notification making assessee eligible for deduction u/s Sec. 10A.
NTT Data Global Advisory Services Pvt. Ltd Vs The CIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24639 (HC-KARNATAKA) · Section 10A
-
Question of possession of insider information is irrelevant short-term capital loss incurred with respect to the units which were purchased within a period of three months prior to the record date and sold within a period of nine months after such record date, shall be ignored to the extent of such loss, not exceeding the amount of dividend income for computing the income chargeable to tax.
Yesha Electricals Pvt. Ltd. Vs Additional Commissioner of Income Tax
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24638 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
-
If the assessee files some application for correcting the return filed or making amends therein, it would not mean that he has filed a revised return. It will retain the character of the original return.
M/s. TRC Engineering India Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24637 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
-
The assessee was working in UK for more than 183 days which was never disputed by the Revenue at any point of time. Besides this the Revenue authorities are very well aware that the assessee has paid taxes in for the remuneration received in UK. The assessee is a resident of India. Therefore, Article 16(2) does not apply in the present scenario.
Kapil Dev Ranwan Vs DCIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24636 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
As per CEC's report, compensatory payments are required to be made by the leaseholders for repairing the environmental depredation brought in due to illegal mining and overburden dumps beyond the sanctioned leased areas.
M/s Ramgad Minerals & Mining Limited Vs ACIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24635 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 37
-
Revenue's response to assessee's stay application is prima facie non reasoned and shows non application of mind.
ALCATEL LUCENT INTERNATIONAL Vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24624 (HC-DELHI)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.