-
In the case on hand, the impugned order came to be passed on 19.02.2019 and till the issuance of the assessment notices dated 15.07.2019 under Section 153A of the Act, the petitioner did not challenge the order of transfer and there is no explanation for the delay in challenge.
V.V. MINERALS VERSUS THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21174 (HC-MADRAS) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82554&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
After examining the requirement of Article 5 of the DTAA to constitute agency Permanent Establishment, Tribunal as a matter of fact held that none of the conditions as stipulated in Article 5(4) was applicable because Taj India was acting independently qua its distribution rights and the entire agreement was on principal to principal basis.
Taj TV Limited Vs Commissioner of Income Tax (IT)
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21173 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
The petitioner is allowed liberty to withdraw the present special leave petition, with further liberty to approach the authority under the Scheme.
INTEC Corporation Vs PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX II
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21172 (SC)
-
The mere issuance of draft assessment order, when it was legally not required to be issued, cannot end up enhancing the time limit for completing the assessment under section 143(3).
IPF India Property Cyprus (No.1) Ltd Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax International Taxation
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21171 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Availing of net based services are outside the ambit of FTS provisions particularly when it cannot chargeable to tax in India and further as per the information submitted before us, the assessee has utilized these information outside India.
Triton Communications Pvt. Ltd Vs ACIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21170 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
When the assessee was providing services to its members as well as non members, it can never be categorized under mutuality concept. The mutuality concept can be applied only when a mutual concern or AOP, who agree to contribute funds for common purpose and receive back the surplus left out in the same capacity in which they made the contribution. Therefore, the capacity as contributors and participants remain same. When they cannot separate the activities of participants and non members, they can never be considered as mutual concern.
FIXED INCOME MONEY MARKET AND DERIVATIVES ASSOCIATION OF INDIA VERSUS ITO (E) – 1 (3), MUMBAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21169 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82195&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Mere existence of the close connection and 'more than ordinary profits' are not enough to assume an arrangement as contemplated u/s. 80-IA(10) of the Act. The Assessing Officer is also required to prove any such arrangement existing which resulted in more than ordinary profits. The learned AO has not proved any arrangement between the parties in the facts of the case.
THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, PUNE. VERSUS PERSISTENT SYSTEMS PVT. LTD. AND (VICE-VERSA)
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21168 (ITAT-PUNE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82196&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The Ld.PCIT has questioned the issue of suppression of turnover, which is also a matter of deliberation by the Ld. AO during the reassessment proceedings and hence, we are of the considered view that the Ld. PCIT was completely erred in invoking jurisdiction to revise the assessment order passed by the Ld. AO u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the I.T.Act, 1961, in respect of very same issue of suppression of turnover, which was very much deliberated by the Ld. AO during the assessment proceedings.
K.R. CONSTRUCTION BASEMENT VERSUS PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CENTRAL-3, MUMBAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21167 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82197&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
It was the responsibility of the assessee to furnish documentary evidence in support that the NOIDA has paid tax to the Income-Tax department on lease rental income i.e. for the amount of the tax which was deductible on lease rental payment under reference, along with the interest. If the said interest has already been paid by the NOIDA, no recovery can be made from the assessee for the said amount of the interest.
PRATEEK BUILDTECH (INDIA) PVT. LTD. VERSUS ACIT, CIRCLE – 76 (1), NEW DELHI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21166 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82198&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The answer certainly is in negative. It is because there can be a situation when the assessee is not able to generate any business but it has to incur the expenses to keep its business setup in existence. Thus in such a situation the assessee cannot be denied the claim of expenses incurred during the period when he was not able to generate the business. Furthermore, it is also important to note that the business is governed by the market forces which are beyond the control of the assessee.
SHRI ATUL BABUBHAI SHAH VERSUS THE JCIT RANGE-10 AHMEDABAD, THE ACIT, CIRCLE-11 AHMEDABAD
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21165 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82200&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
It is not in dispute that the petitioner had applied for the occupancy certificate along with the architect's certificate before the Bangalore Development Authority on December 29, 2006 well within the stipulated period of one year as enumerated in condition No. 5(ii) of the approval under the Scheme 2002 and the said occupancy certificate was issued on June 23, 2007.
SOFTZONE TECH PARK LTD. VERSUS CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES AND UOI, REPSENTED BY THE SECRETARY, THE DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL POLICY & PROMOTION
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21164 (HC-KARNATAKA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82539&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The amount of Rs.495.24 crores deposited towards payment of tax and the amount of Rs.2806.40 crores which stands deposited and invested in the form of Fixed Deposit Receipts shall be subject to the decision to be taken by the concerned Authority on merits or to such directions as may be issued by the Appellate Authority.
Cognizant Technology Solutions India Pvt. Limited Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21163 (SC)
-
As per Sec.115BBC any trust or institution, receiving anonymous donations, is not required to mention identity/address and other particulars in the books.
G.S.L. Educational Society Vs ACIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21162 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM) · Section 271AAB
-
Admittedly, AS-14 nowhere prescribed for different method of computation of net worth of undertaking acquired by way of slump sale for different purposes.
Abhishri Packaging Pvt.Ltd Vs DCIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21161 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Sec. 11 & 12 are the substantive provisions providing exemptions to charitable/religious Trusts while Sec. 12A & 12AA are procedural in nature providing for the procedural requirements for making an application to claim the benefits u/s. 11 & 12.
Bandanthamma Mathu Kalamma Trust Vs The Income Tax Officer
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21160 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 12A
-
The payments made by the assessee is towards provision of bandwidth/telecommunications services for the use of, or right to use equipment.
M/s. Vidal Health Insurance TPA Pvt. Ltd. Vs The Joint Commissioner of Income – tax (OSD)
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21159 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Sections 9(1)(vi), 194J
-
There is no estoppel in law and therefore merely because in few cases the Department had issued NIL tax deduction certificate u/s 195 cannot be the sole reason for claiming that every payment made by the assessee to foreign attorneys was not liable to tax in India.
Sri Subhatosh Majumder Vs ACIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21158 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · Section 9(1)(vii)
-
Once the tribunal has held that the amounts collected by Ferani during the pendency of the suit and kept in FD's are amounts kept in custody of the court and not accessible to the Administrator till disposal of the suit and to be governed by the final order of the high court, then the amounts so collected cannot be considered to be income of the assessee. AO has brought to tax advances which the assessee had received during the period 1996-97 to 2008-09 totally ₹ 269,48,90,856/- under the head other source.
ITO (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) -2 (1) (1) VERSUS ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE OF LATE MR. E.F. DINSHAW
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21157 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82157&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The expression does not form part of the total income u/s. 14A of the I.T. Act envisages that there should be actual receipt of income which was not includible in the total income, during the relevant previous year, for the purpose of disallowance of any expenditure incurred in relation to the said income. In other words, section 14A of the Act would not apply if no exempt income was received or receivable during the relevant previous year.
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 (3) , BENGALURU VERSUS M/S. COFFEE DAY GLOBAL LIMITED
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21156 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82160&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Case file suggests that the clinching factual position herein is that the assessee had declared additional income of ₹12,56,69,73/- in its disclosure petition(s) before the Settlement Commission on 18.03.2014 for assessment year(s) 2010-11 to 2013-14. It is an admitted fact that the said additional income had not been included in the corresponding computation(s) finalized earlier.
M/S MAITHAN STEEL & POWER LTD. VERSUS PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21155 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82161&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.