-
The income brought to tax u/s. 41 by reversal of the entry with regard to the stock option given to the employees is also in the nature of export income.
California Software Co., Ltd Vs The Commissioner of Income Tax-I
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21134 (HC-MADRAS) · Sections 10, 10B, 41
-
The assessee has certified that no new project was started or commissioned during the year for which above guarantee was paid, and the guarantee fees was in respect of loans for acquisition of capital assets, which were already put-to-use prior to 1.4.2007. The guarantee fees is directed to be allowed as revenue expenditure, subject to verification by the AO of the certificate filed during the appellate proceedings i.e. there was no capital work-in-progress in respect of loans on which guarantee fees was paid.
THE DY. CIT CIRCLE-1 (1) (1), VADODARA VERSUS GUJARAT ENERGY TRANSMISSION CORP. LTD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21133 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82107&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
When the redeemable preferential shares have been redeemed to the investor companies in subsequent years which is much prior to the search, therefore, these investments are genuine. We further find from the various pages of the paper book that in response to the notice issued u/s 133(6) to the investor companies, the directors of the respective investor companies appeared before the AO whose statements were recorded u/s 131 and they have confirmed to have invested in the shares of the assessee company.
NIMBUS (INDIA) LTD., C/O RRA TAXINDIA VERSUS DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, NOIDA.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21132 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82108&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
A plain reading of the order passed by the Dispute Resolution Panel shows that the issue in appeal is squarely covered by a decision of the coordinate bench, in assessee’s own case for the assessment year 2010-11 in favour of the assessee. The only reason, on account of which the DRP has declined relief to the assessee, is to keep the matter alive for the SLP, if any, before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. We, therefore, uphold the plea of the assessee and hold that the receipts in question cannot be treated as royalty.
IMG MEDIA LTD. VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (IT) - 2 (2) (1) MUMBAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21131 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82109&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The assessee had filed the return of income on 31/10/2013 for the A.Y. 2013-14 which is placed in paper book at page No. 41, therefore the Assessing Officer is not correct in rejecting the plea of the assessee on the ground that the assessee has not filed the return of income as per specified date.
ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RAJAHMUNDRY. VERSUS G.S.L. EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY AND (VICE-VERSA)
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21130 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82115&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) were neither initiated by the AO during assessment proceedings nor by the Ld. CIT(A) during the appellate proceedings in respect of the aforesaid disallowance. CIT(A) has also not levied any penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of I.T. Act.
ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VERSUS M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21129 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82088&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
There is no material whatsoever to indicate, leave aside establish, that the Assessing Officer had examined the application of Section 56(2)(vii)(b) at all. Learned counsel’s plea that this provision to section 56(2)(vii)(b) comes into play, overlooks the fact that application of proviso is entirely a factual matter which has not been examined at all.
KIRTIDEVI S. TEJWANI VERSUS PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-22 MUMBAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21128 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82090&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The said that the investment shown by the appellant was understated and that anything above what was disclosed by the appellant. Thus, the condition precedent for making reference to the DVO by invoking the provisions of Sec. 142A was not satisfied in the present case. Moreover, on perusal of the assessment order, it is noted that nowhere the AO has mentioned that what are the mistakes and unreliability has been found out by the AO in the books of accounts of the appellant.
DCIT, CIRCLE 25 (1), NEW DELHI VERSUS SMT. USHA RANI TALLA, URVASHI TALLA
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21127 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82093&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
A.O, did not doubt the identity of the creditors and their creditworthiness. The A.O. merely doubted genuineness of the transaction because of the disproportionate income of the creditors as regards the loan advanced to the assessee. In case A.O. was having any doubt on any of the point, he could have summoned all the creditors and record their statements on oath under section 131 of the I.T. Act, 1961, to find-out the truth.
MEENU KAPOOR VERSUS THE ACIT, CIRCLE-47 (1), NEW DELHI.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21126 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82094&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Section 119 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has been incorporated to grant waiver from payment of interest in case of genuine hardship. Therefore, the Central Board of Direct Taxes has given power to issue instructions and direction to be followed while granting waiver of interest. This power is either exercised by the Board and/or by senior officers of the Income Tax Department like the first respondent.
TVL. SANMAC MOTOR FINANCE LTD. VERSUS CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21125 (HC-MADRAS) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82470&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
In the instant case the applicant was incorporated few days before the JV was formed and has no independent sources of funds or sources of income nor has any fiscal independence. All the funds are with the holding companies. The applicant has no tangible assets, business activities except for owning the shares of the JV.
IN RE: BID SERVICES DIVISION (MAURITIUS) LTD.,
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21124 (AAR) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82471&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The sole reliance upon the FIRC which is only a certificate of remittance from abroad in absence of the overwhelming surrounding circumstances by the learned CIT appeals not at all sustainable.
Shri Arun Madhvachari Rangachari Vs DCIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21123 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Converting raw coffee beans which are not fit for human consumption as such to liquid coffee which is fit for human consumption has to be considered as manufacturing activity, as it is an irreversible process producing different marketable product fit for human consumption.
Coffee Day Global Limited Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21122 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
-
As the petitioner was under a legal disability during the period between 18.06.2001 and 27.10.2006, during the subsistence of winding up order and since the petitioner company was under the control of this court and the official liquidator, I am of the view, this is a fit case for granting partial relief to the petitioner.
Tvl. Sanmac Motor Finance Ltd Vs Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, ACIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21121 (HC-MADRAS) · Section 234A/B/C
-
Since the issue stands concluded in favour of the assessee there would be no need to continue with the reassessment on that score.
M/S SHIV SHAKTI FLOUR MILLS (P) LTD. Vs COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21120 (SC)
-
As per the copy of the agreement placed on record at page 53, the sellers i.e. assessee and other co-sharers of land and the purchasers namely Zora Singh, Darvesh, Lakshan Mirdha and Barinder belong to the same city i.e. Narwana. As per the said agreement the amount of ₹ 50 lacs was received by the assessee and other co-sharers on 18.12.2010 and an amount of ₹ 50 lacs was agreed to be received on 15.1.2011 and further an amount of ₹ 50 lacs on 15.2.2011.
SHRI RANJIT SINGH VERSUS THE ITO, WARD-1, JIND (HARYANA)
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21119 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82078&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
There is no dispute that the assessee is an authorised money changer. In our considered opinion, this line of business required availability of cash in huge amount as the persons give dollars to be exchanged in Indian currency. Considering the exchange rate, the assessee has to carry heavy cash. To this extent, we do not find any quarrel between the assessee and the revenue.
R.G. CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD. VERSUS THE DY. C.I.T. CIRCLE – 15 (1) , NEW DELHI AND (VICE-VERSA)
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21118 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82080&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The assessee held the agricultural land for more than 9 years as investment and this land was situated in rural area more than 17 Km away from Municipal Limit. This land was used for agricultural purpose and considering the location of this land, in near future it cannot be used for non-agricultural purposes. The AO himself has accepted that the land is an agricultural land out of definition of capital assets.
DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR. VERSUS M/S MOTISONS BUILDTECH PVT. LTD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21117 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82081&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
When the assessee has produced all the relevant documents as narrated by the ld. CIT(A) in para 5.11 above then onus casted u/s 68 of the Act has been duly discharged by the assessee. Once the assessee has discharged his primary onus then burden is shifted on the AO to bring on record the contrary material or facts to disprove evidence produced by the assessee. The AO except narrating the modus operandi as disclosed by Shri Anand Sharma, has not referred to any documentary evidence or other material to support his view and findings.
THE ITO WARD- 4 (2) JAIPUR VERSUS M/S. SKYWAYS INDUSTRIAL ESTATE COMPANY (P) LTD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21116 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82083&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The argument that there is no such stipulation in the letter releasing the grant does not lead to the automatic conclusion that the interest is income of the Assessee. It is not the case of the appellant that the books of the Assessee ever revealed the diversion of any interest income. Had that been so something could have been said. The other argument raised by the counsel for the appellant is that the Tribunal wrongly invoked Section 10 (23BBA) of the Act and the invocation of that Section completely blind-sided the Tribunal into taking a wrong decision.
THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I, CHANDIGARH. VERSUS M/S PUNJAB POLICE HOUSING CORPORATION LTD.,
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21115 (HC-P&H) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82449&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.