-
Declining the claim of the assessee by the AO nowhere attracted the penalty being it is not a case of furnishing the inaccurate particulars of income and concealment of particulars of income.
Jamsetji Tata Trust Vs ACIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24516 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 11
-
Non-resident assessee not liable to pay advance tax and subsequently the interest u/s 234B as duty is cast upon the payer to deduct and pay tax at source.
ESPN Star Sports Mauritius Vs ACIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24515 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
As per provisions of section 14A disallowance has to be computed having regards to the accounts of the assessee and if the said method adopted by the assessee was found to be not satisfactory, only then the computation was to be done as per Rule 8D.
Tata Projects Limited Vs ACIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24514 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 14
-
Section 260A does not empower the HC to reconsider its earlier view in the same proceedings and reformulate a question of law which it had refused to formulate citing the MP HC ruling in Kishanchand v. Ramkrishna.
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs V. M. SALGAONKAR BROTHERSPRIVATE LIMITED
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24507 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
Considering exception clause carved in Sub Clause (d) of Clause 3 of the said CBDT Instruction, the Assessing Officer should have sought permission from the ld. PCIT to enquire into this issue of assessability of payment of on-money consideration at the time of purchase of land.
M/s. Sahayamatha Salterns Pvt. Ltd Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24506 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Section 263
-
Merely pointing out to a source and the source admitting that it has made the payments is not sufficient to discharge the burden placed on the assessees by Section 68.
The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Sadiq Sheikh
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24493 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 68
-
In the present case there was no reference made by the authorities below suggesting that the transaction is carried illegally. Moreover, the transactions in the instant case were within the ambit of the law as per the provision of section 2(1B) of the Act.
Urmin Marketing P. Ltd. Vs DCIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24492 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
-
MIPL did not fulfil any of the three conditions set forth in Article 5(7) of India- Japan.
ACIT Vs M/s. Mitsui & Co. Ltd.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24480 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
There is no strict requirement of completion of construction u/s 54F(1) to become eligible for exemption. The passport to derive benefit under sec 54F(1) is investment in construction of property within the period required u/s 54F(1) or to invest in residential property within the stipulated time for enabling deduction under section 54F of the Act.
Padma Rajagopalan Vs The Income Tax Officer
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24479 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
-
The provisions of section 44AD of the Act overrides all other provisions contained in section 28 to 43C. Admittedly, the provisions of section 40(a)(ia)of the Act falls within this range of sections 28 to 43C of Chapter-XVII B of the I.T. Act.
Shri Bipinchandra Hiralal Thakkar Vs Income Tax Officer
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24478 (ITAT-SURAT) · Sections 40(a)(ia), 44AD
-
There is no separate interest expenditure incurred by assessee other than the interest incurred to earn interest income, therefore disallowance u/s.14A is unwarranted.
Shri Vinay Ramakant Sapte Vs DCIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24477 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 57(iii)
-
Revenue can alter book-profit only as per Explanation 1 to Sec. 115JB(2) and cannot recast the audited accounts that are adopted under the Companies Act.
Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Private Limited Vs DCIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24476 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 115JB
-
For invoking Sec. 36(1)(ii), the AO will have to give clear cut finding as to what was tax avoidance or tax evasion involved in this case.
Mehta Equities Ltd. Vs DCIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24475 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 36(1)(ii)
-
Perversity can be taken up in an appeal u/s. 260A.
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Shri. Rakesh Sarin
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24468 (HC-MADRAS) · Section 260A
-
The law provides for imposition of penalty by an officer of the rank of the Joint Commissioner. Thus, the AO is statutorily debarred for forming any satisfaction either at the time of assessment order or subsequent thereto.
M/s. B. P. Patel and Co. Vs ITO
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24467 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · Section 271E
-
Income taxed under DTAA cannot be included in the calculation of adjusted total income under Exp. (i) to Sec. 44C as the computation provisions u/s. 28 to 43CA do not apply there.
MUFG Bank Ltd. Vs ACIT (International Taxation)
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24466 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 44C
-
Share transfer did not amount to indirect transfer u/s 9(1)(i) in the light of Explanations 6 & 7 inserted vide Finance Act, 2015.
Augustus Capital PTE Ltd Vs The Dy.C.I.T
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24454 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
There is a difference between net assets which is based on the net book value of the assets and the fair market value of the assets as on the date of issue of shares.
M/s. Nabh Multitrade Pvt. Ltd. Vs The Income Tax Officer
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24453 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
-
SC - SLP Dismissed - Writ against case transfer u/s. 127 from Tirunelveli to Madurai dismissed by HC.
V.V. MINERALS Vs THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ORS.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24446 (SC) · Section 127
-
HC - The disallowance of expenditure incurred to earn exempted income u/s 14A of the Income Tax Act, cannot exceed such exempt income itself during the relevant AY. The disallowance of expenditure incurred for the year in question only can be considered under Section 14A of the Act and no such hypothetical earning in future as against no expenditure incurred for that, is envisaged under Section 14A.
M/s. Marg Limited Vs Commissioner of Income Tax
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24445 (HC-MADRAS) · Section 14A
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.