-
If 8 per cent of gross receipts are deemed income of the assessee, the remaining 92 per cent are also deemed expenditure of the assessee. Meaning thereby that actual expenditure may not be 92 per cent of gross receipts, only for the purposes of taxation, it is considered to be so. Expenditure may be less than 92 per cent or it may also be more than 92 per cent of gross receipts.
SYED KHALID SAIFULLAH VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-28 (4) , NEW DELHI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22430 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83033&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Assessee has already filed original return of income accompanied by P & L A/c, balance-sheet. In the original return of income, the assessee has disclosed the receipt of ₹ 7 lakhs from Shri Praveen Kumar as per balance-sheet. Copy of the ledger account shows that it is already disclosed in the books of account of the assessee. Therefore, receipt of ₹ 7 lakhs from Shri Praveen Kumar as advance was already disclosed in the original return of income.
M/S. ALANKAR SAPHIRE DEVELOPERS VERSUS THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-15 (OLD), CENTRAL CIRCLE-14 (NEW) NEW DELHI., THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-14, NEW DELHI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22429 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83037&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
In a decision reported in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Punjab Financial Corporation) section 32AB(5) of the Act is not mandatory and the Assessing Officer has the discretion to entertain the audit report even though the same has not been filed with the return but presented during the course of assessment proceedings and give benefit of the deduction to the assessee in terms of Section 32AB(1).
THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I, BHOPAL VERSUS M/S KILPEST INDIA LIMITED
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22428 (HC-MP) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82866&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
In the case in hand, once it was found that there was double addition on same papers for two assessment years for a single project, it cannot be said that the assessee had failed to explain the loose papers despite the onus was placed upon him to prove the loose papers. No benefit can be derived by the Revenue from the judgment in Chuharmals case which is distinguishable on facts and is not applicable in the present case.
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 VERSUS M/S GEETANJALI BUILDERS PVT. LTD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22427 (HC-MP) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82867&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
In the present case, the expenditure on advertisement and sales promotion has been claimed for deduction as revenue expenditure. The advertisement and sales promotion is the necessity of the business and thus, an integral part of the business activity. Therefore, the expenses incurred on advertisement etc. are not for acquisition of an asset or right of a permanent character, therefore, cannot be said to be a capital expenditure. It is but a revenue expenditure.
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BHOPAL VERSUS M/S GODREJ FOODS LIMITED
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22426 (HC-MP) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82868&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
What is prohibited is the infusion of a participant in the transaction who does not become a ‘member’ of the common fund, at par with other members, and yet participates either in the contribution or surplus without subjecting itself to mutual rights and obligations. The principle of common identity prohibits any one dimensional alteration in the nature of participation in the mutual fund as the transaction fructifies.
YUM! RESTAURANTS (MARKETING) PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22425 (SC) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82869&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
As the assessee had been shown beyond doubt to be the owner of the residential house/Bungalow situated at Lonawala, therefore, irrespective of the fact that the said property was not occupied by him due to its poor quality of construction, the same continued to be a residential house which was owned by the assessee.
CHANDRAMOHAN MANOHAR POTDAR VERSUS ACIT-21 (3) MUMBAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22424 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83012&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The audit note/observation cannot constitute the opinion of the Assessing Officer when it comes to the applicability of the provisions of section 148 of the Act qua the reason to belief. The CIT(A), as per discussion given in para 5 onwards quashed the validity of the reassessment proceedings and allowed the appeal of the assessee.
ACIT, CIRCLE-3, NAGPUR. VERSUS UNITECH POWER TRANSMISSION LTD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22423 (ITAT-NAGPUR) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83013&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Without following the procedure as contemplated u/s. 144C of the Act the AO issued demand notice and penalty notice. Thereby, in our opinion, the final assessment order 28-04-2014 passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(3) of the Act lacked validity and it is liable to be quashed.
VANDERLANDE INDUSTRIES B.V., C/O VIPL VERSUS ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) – II, HYDERABAD
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22422 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83022&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
From 1983 onwards, Section 43B had taken within its fold diverse nature of deductions, ranging from tax, duty to bonus, commission, railway fee, interest on loans and general provisions for welfare of employees. An external examination of this journey of Section 43B reveals that the legislature never restricted it to a particular category of deduction and that intent cannot be read into the main Section by the Court, while sitting in judicial review.
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. VERSUS EXIDE INDUSTRIES LIMITED & ANR.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22421 (SC) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82860&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The appellate authority vide order dated 13.1.2011, had not only accepted the explanation offered by the appellant/assessee but also recorded a clear finding of fact that there was no concealment of income or furnishing of any inaccurate particulars of income by the appellant/assessee for the assessment year 1998-1999.
BASIR AHMED SISODIYA VERSUS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22420 (SC) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82861&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The expression business connection can be discerned from Section 9(1), as also, the meaning of expression business activity. We will advert to those provisions a little later and for the time being, assume that the stated activities of the respondent are business activities. However, since the stated activities of the liaison offices of the respondent in India are of preparatory or auxiliary character, the same would fall within the excepted category under Article 5(3)(e) of the DTAA.
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. VERSUS U.A.E. EXCHANGE CENTRE
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22419 (SC) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82862&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Bare reading of the assessment order dated 3-12-2010 does not reveal that any enquiry was conducted by the AO on the issue of nature of income arising from the arrangement of development of commercial complex after demolition of Cinema Hall Building on the land in question.
THE DCIT CIRCLE – 2 JAIPUR VERSUS M/S. MAN PRAKASH TALKIES PVT. LTD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22418 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83009&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
It is also an admitted fact that name of the assessee nowhere appeared in the said document albeit the name of Smt. Vineeta Chaurasia that she has entered into an agreement for sale of commercial property in Vasant Square Mall has been mentioned. Apart from that, the aforesaid finding of the Ld. CIT(A) that this addition cannot be made in the hands of the assessee for the reason that, firstly, the name of the assessee is not mentioned in the seized document.
DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI. VERSUS M/S. SUNCITY PROJECTS PVT. LTD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22417 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83006&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
In view of the attachment of asessee’s bank accounts and assessee’s debtors, the assessee is stated to be not in a position to perform these obligations. Given this situation, we are satisfied that this situation calls for our interference. In any case, even though we refrain from commenting upon merits of the case at this stage, we find that prima facie the assessee has an arguable case in appeal.
PANDHES INFRACON PVT LTD VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 (3) , MUMBAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22416 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83005&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The satisfaction would be dependent on the approval of the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax is that only if the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax accorded approval for prosecution than the satisfaction of the Commissioner of Income Tax could be considered and acted upon by sanctioning prosecution. However, if the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax were to refuse permission then the Commissioner of Income Tax though satisfied could not initiate any proceedings due to the non approval by the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax.
M/S. PACE VISION VERSUS THE INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT BY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, BELGAUM.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22415 (HC-KARNATAKA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82854&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Except last nine years, the property which comprises land and building was let out by the assessee for a long period. The assessee had earned income by way of rent and rental income so received by the assessee was offered for taxation as income from the house property. The assessee has shown the property in question as capital asset in its balance sheet. There is no material on record to hold that the aforesaid property was converted by the assessee as an item of stock in trade.
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX AND THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE-1 (1) , VERSUS THIRUMALA VENKATESHWARA ESTATE AND AGENCIES
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22414 (HC-KARNATAKA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82855&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The present matter is not a case of mechanical reliance on circulars/office memorandums. It is a case where proof of identity of the loan depositors, capacity of the creditors to advance loans and genuineness of transaction is in serious dispute. Further, this Court finds that the stay application has been decided on merits and all the submissions made hereinabove by the petitioner have been considered by the statutory authorities below.
JITF URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES LIMITED VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22413 (HC-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82856&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The petitioners suffered an order of assessment in the year 2019. The petitioners preferred an appeal against such order of assessment. There is a stay petition pending also. The revenue authorities issued recovery notice on March 5, 2020. Revenue authorities received the recovery amount from the concerned banks. All these measures took place prior to the order dated March 20, 2020 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
BANSHIHARI LARGE SIZED MULTIPURPOSE CO-OP SOCIETY LTD. AND ANR., UDAYAN LARGE SIZED MULTIPURPOSE CO-OP SOCIETY LTD. AND ANR., NAZIRPUR LARGE SIZED MULTIPURPOSE CO-OP SOCIETY LTD. AND ANR. VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22412 (HC-CALCUTTA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82858&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Under Section 68, the onus is on the assessee to offer explanation where any sum is found credited in the books of account and where the assessee fails to prove to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer, the source and nature of the amount of cash credits an inference may be drawn that the credit entries represent income taxable in the hands of the assessee.
M/S KESHARWANI SHEETALAYA SAHSAON ALLAHABAD VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ALLAHABAD
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22411 (HC-ALLAHABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82859&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.