-
Had the principal amounts been paid promptly to the petitioners in terms of Section 269UG(1), it is the petitioners who would have got the benefit of the interest on the said amounts, in fact more, considering the delay in making the payments from 30.09.1994 to 21.07.1995.
Desiree M. Thakur and another Vs The Appropriate Authority and another
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22590 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
As is apparent on a plain reading of the reasons recorded, while the Assessing Officer has information that M/s JP Infrastructure Limited has advanced unsecured loans as referred to therein to its sister concerns, viz. Gujarat Mall Management Co. Pvt. Ltd. and Aryan Arcade Pvt. Ltd., there is no information to the effect that such payment was made for the benefit of the petitioner.
Jayesh T Kotak Vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22589 (HC-GUJARAT) · Section 2(22)(e)
-
It is open to the statutory authorities to grant relief to deposit an amount lesser than 20% if the facts of the case so warrant.
JINDAL ITF LIMITED Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22588 (HC-DELHI)
-
The pharmacy store of the assessee was ancillary to the main object of running the hospital and therefore income accrued therefrom was incidental to the dominant object of running a hospital.
Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-(Exemption) Vs The National Health and Education Society
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22587 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 11(4A)
-
The notice issued to the assessee shows sufficient reasons to believe on the part of the assessing officer to reopen the assessment but since the revenue has failed to show nondisclosure of facts the notice having been issued after a period of 4 years is required to be quashed.
NEW DELHI TELEVISION LTD. Vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22586 (SC)
-
Addition of the aforesaid amounts would amount to double addition.
Sarita Tyagi Vs ITO
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22585 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 68
-
The minimum guarantee amount paid by the distributor for acquiring the exhibition rights of a movie is a fixed expenditure for the distributor that is paid to producers irrespective of the fact whether the film generates a profit or incurs losses.
Sh. Yashovardhan Tyagi Vs ITO
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22584 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 9(1)(vi)
-
The belief of income escapement based purely on audit objection is nothing but a shame believe in the garb of audit objection raised by the Revenue which cannot be the basis for reopening of the assessment in the absence of any changed circumstances on the part of the assesse.
Lionbridge Technologies P. Ltd. Vs Asst. CIT.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22583 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Even an indirect connection between the expenditure incurred and the income could prove the nexus between the two. The bank charges being related to the interest income are duly allowable as expenditure in the hands of the assesse.
Chander Mohan Merwah Vs The ACIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22582 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 57(1)
-
Intimation in Form-10 for the purposes of claiming the benefit of the Section 11 could be furnished by the assessee even during the assessment proceedings.
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) Vs SOFTWARE TECHNOLOGIES PARKS OF INDIA
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22581 (SC) · Section 11
-
Treating the actual forex loss as transaction carried out in forex derivatives, which was actually incurred by the assessee when the said loans were received back, is against the facts.
Ninestars Information Technologies Pvt. Ltd Vs The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22580 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
-
First proviso to Section 50C of the Act, is applicable retrospectively. It does not create any new right between the parties. It simply clarifies the existing position of law.
The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Shri Vummidi Amarendran
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22579 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Section 50C
-
There can be various reasons for executing the two sale deeds, one such reason being to avoid deduction of tax. The vacant site purchased by the assessee which is adjacent to the residential house is necessary for convenient enjoyment of the building.
Shri M D Sundar Rao Vs The Income Tax Officer
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22578 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Section 54
-
Dividend has to be paid to all the shareholders equally and dividend is basically a return of investment and not salary or part thereof.
Abro Technologies Pvt. Ltd Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22577 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 36(1)(ii)
-
The outside lorry/truck owners do not have any responsibility or liability towards the principal, then it cannot be held that these outside parties were privity to the contract between the assessee and its principal. Therefore, the payment made to the outside lorry/truck owners do not come or fall within the purview of section 194C of the Act.
Bimal Kumar Sikaria Vs ACIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22576 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
-
Finding recorded by the Ld. CIT(Exemption) that the registration cannot be granted for the assessee as it is involved in imparting the training to the employees of the state govt, is incorrect and contrary to the law. For this purposes, we may rely upon the decision of CIT Vs. Andhra Pradesh Police Welfare Society and Water and land Management Training Research Institute and DIT Vs. National Safely Counsel.
VIBHAGIYA PRASHASKIYA PRASHIKSHAN SANSTHA, C/O. DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER OFFICE CAMPUS VERSUS THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) PUNE.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22575 (ITAT-PUNE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83408&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Department has no material to show that the earlier withdrawals made by the assessee has been spent for any specific purposes and not the said amount available with the assessee to redeposit into the bank account. There is also no evidence that the assessee has made withdrawals on various dates for any other purposes than the admission of assessee’s son in a medical college.
SRI. DHRUVA MUNGAMURI C/O. S. PARTHASARATHI VERSUS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5 (3) (5) BENGALURU
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22574 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83409&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Assessee has two main stream of revenues, one from NOP Project and from other project. Assessee is basically construction contractor and also indulged in developing and sale of project named NOP. On overall basis, assessee is following percentage completion method. Whether the method of percentage of completion method can be applied for construction contract as well as real estate development project with reference Guidance Note GN(A) 23 (R2012).
SHAKTI PROPERTY DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. VERSUS DCIT CEN CIR-8 (1) , MUMBAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22573 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83410&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
It is an undisputed fact that the assessee carried out repair and renovation expenses on a lease property which was taken on lease and any such repair and maintenance of lease property cannot be held to be giving any enduring benefit to the assessee, firstly for the reason that leased premises is for temporary period and nature of expenses are purely in nature of repairs.
ASPECT RESEARCH AND MANAGEMENT P. LTD. VERSUS ITO, WARD-2 (2) , NEW DELHI.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22572 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83412&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Though the assessee made an oral plea that the money had been advanced to the sister concerns on account of commercial expediency, the assessee failed to place any evidence to suggest whether funds advanced by the assessee to the sister concerns was in the nature of interest free own funds or the funds were advanced on account of commercial expediency.
MANGALAM PUBLICATIONS (INDIA) (P.) LTD. VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22571 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83413&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.