-
The issue of whether refund shall be adjusted against interest payable and balance, if any, shall be adjusted towards tax payable has come up for consideration in assessee’s own case for the A.Y. 2008-09 and the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer while computing the interest u/s. 244A shall adjust the amount of refund already granted first towards the interest component and balance left, if any, shall be adjusted towards the tax component.
M/S. UNION BANK OF INDIA VERSUS DCIT (LTU) – 2 (VICE-VERSA)
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20134 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77948&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The exclusion of a business advance, referred to earlier, i.e., even as the provision speaks of any payment by way of a loan or advance, covering therefore advances of all types, is only on the premise that the said word, read conjunctively with the word ‘loan’, applying the principle of ejusdem generis, should only include payments in the nature of loans, excluding business transactions, which have, as a matter of course, if not necessarily, to be settled by remitting funds; the provision in no manner seeking to impinge on genuine business transactions.
G.G. OILS AND FATS PVT. LTD. VERSUS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, BATHINDA
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20133 (ITAT-AMRITSAR) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77959&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The amount of TDS is always considered as the sum paid by the assessee on behalf of the recipient of the income and, therefore, it cannot be said that the above sum has not been paid by the assessee even while following the cash system of accounting.
Associated Law Advisers Vs ACIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20132 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
S. 254: We express our pain and anxiety. The Tribunal ought not to have recorded any such concession on the part of the AR contrary to the written submissions. There is no justification on the part of the ld. Members of the Tribunal to record any such concession on behalf of the assessee. In future, if any such concession is made by any AR on behalf of the assessees, the Tribunal should take either an Affidavit or at least a written endorsement made on the record of the case duly signed by them, so that no such occasion of taking a stand contra to the alleged concession, would arise before higher Courts
V. Ramesh vs. ACIT (Madras High Court)
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20131 (HC-MADRAS) · Section 254
-
S. 41(1) (old & unpaid liability for sundry creditors): It is well settled through series of judgments that merely because a debt has not been repaid for over three years, would not automatically imply cessation of liability. Exhaustion of period of limitation may prevent filing of recovery proceedings in a Court of law, nevertheless it cannot be stated by itself that the liability to repay the amount had ceased. Such liability cannot be termed as bogus
PCIT vs. Pukhraj S. Jain (Bombay High Court)
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20130 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 41(1)
-
When substantial justice and technical consideration are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred, for the other side cannot claim to have vested right for injustice being done because of non deliberate delay. No counter-affidavit was filed by the Revenue denying the submission made by the assessee.
SMT. MAGGY SUNNY, PROPRIETRIX, M/S. SUNNY JACOB JEWELLERS 916 KERALA SHOWROOM, PAZHAVANGADI VERSUS THE ITO, WARD-3, KOTTAYAM
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20129 (ITAT-COCHIN) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77886&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
It is the duty of the assessee to produce all the bills and vouchers in support of purchase entries found in the books of account. In the absence of the details, the Assessing Officer considered it as bogus purchase. Even before us, the assessee was not able to lead any evidence regarding the genuineness of the purchasers, though the burden is on the assessee to prove the genuineness of the transactions.
SRI. C. SHAJI C/O. DR. K.P. PRADEEP VERSUS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2 (1) THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20128 (ITAT-COCHIN) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77889&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The loss incurred in subscribing to chit fund is allowable if funds raised from such chit is utilized for the purpose of business. On this aspect, there is no finding of authorities below. Before us, the assessee has brought certain additional evidences on record in the form of ledger account of various chits as well as copy of bank statements and it is being claimed before us that the money raised through chit was used for the business purpose.
M/S. INDUS STEELS AND ALLOYS LTD. VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE – 3 (1) (1) , BANGALORE.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20127 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77894&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
It is an agreed position between the parties that the issue raised herein stand concluded against the Revenue and in favour of the Respondent – Assessee. There is no concept of deferred expenditure unless it falls in specified Sections. It held that ordinarily, if the Assessee claims the expenditure in a particular year, it has to be allowed. We note that the expenditure incurred on DRUPA Exhibition is in the nature of marketing and selling expenses.
PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3, MUMBAI VERSUS M/S. MANUGRAPH INDIA PVT. LTD.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20126 (HC-BOMBAY) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79956&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The above claim made by the petitioner for refund of the sum is not disputed by the respondents and on the other hand, the respondents seek four weeks time to refund the same, this Writ Petition is disposed of, by recording the above stand taken by the respondents, also with further direction to the respondents to refund the said sum along with appropriate interest within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
M/S. NARAYANAN CHETTIAR INDUSTRIES VERSUS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20125 (HC-MADRAS) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79957&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
It is an integrated process of manufacture or producing bidi in this case, from the processed Tendu leaves, which qualifies for exemption. The placement of the word ‘processing’ in between ‘manufacturing’ and “or producing articles or things” under sub-section (1A) is also significantly indicate such intention of the Legislature.
GONDIA BEEDI LEAVES CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION, VERSUS UNION OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS) , STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, NAGPUR AND OTHER
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20124 (HC-BOMBAY) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79958&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
No such limitation provision has been enacted with regard to tax collection at source as provided in Section 206C till date. Under the circumstances, where no time limit has been prescribed by the statute for passing order in respect of default in collection of tax at source, a guidance can be possibly obtained from judicial precedents laying down a reasonable time limit as implicit for imposition of levy of tax at source.
ADANI ENTERPRISE LTD. VERSUS DCIT TDS CIRCLE ‘A’ WING, AHMEDABAD
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20123 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77866&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
AO as well as the Ld. CIT(A) had recorded categorical finding in the light of statement of Shri Kamlesh Shah, Director of the company that the assessee was having excess cash during the course of survey for which no explanation has been offered. We further noted that although the assessee claims to have taken the benefit of telescoping towards income offered from Solitaire Project, but while recording statement during the course of survey it was the case of the assessee that excess cash found during the course of survey represents unaccounted income.
M/S. SILVER LAND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. VERSUS ACIT, CIRCLE-10 (2) , MUMBAI
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20122 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77869&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Physical verification of stock was carried out by the assesese-company on its own as a matter of internal control in the month of January and February, 2015 well before the search and the surplus stock found on such physical verification having been accounted for by the assessee-company in its books of account in the month of March, 2015 itself, the same, in our opinion, cannot be treated as unexplained investment of the assessee, which is chargeable to tax under section 69.
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VERSUS M/S. NEW HORIZONS LIMITED
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20121 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77874&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Appellant did not furnish any documentary evidence to prove that the loan taken from 1IFSL and transferred directly to MIPL was for the purpose of the business of the appellant though it was the onus of the appellant to prove the business exigency of giving loan of such a huge amount without interest after borrowing the same on huge interest expenses.
SHRI SHREYAS V. SHAH VERSUS DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 BARODA
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20120 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77877&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
As considered the relevant documentary evidences brought on record. We have also perused the judicial decisions relied upon by both the rival representatives. The DRP has simply followed the directions of the Tribunal in readjudication proceedings to assist the Assessing Officer in determining the issues raised before the Tribunal in the first round of litigation.
HITACHI HIGH TECHNOLOGIES SINGAPORE PTE LTD. VERSUS THE DY. C.I.T, CIRCLE - GURGAON AND INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20119 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77860&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
In the present case the central bureau of investigation has made the detailed enquiry and found that the financing of the appellant to the extent stated in the reasons recorded are not what is disclosed by the assessee but a camouflage transaction.
BRIJBASI EDUCATION AND WELFARE SOCIETY VERSUS ADDL. CIT, RANGE-1, GHAZIABAD
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20118 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77862&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
AO has received information from Sales Tax Department(VAT), Investigation Division, Mumbai intimating that bogus sellers having specified TIN And PAN numbers were operating. The transactions in respect of the assessee has already been categorically identified and specified in respect of the three assessment years. The said documents had been given to the assessee for his rebuttal. The assessee has failed to prove the genuineness of the Purchasers affected with the material evidence.
M/S. S.V.P.N.S.N. BALASIVAJI NADAR & SONS VERSUS THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD -4, VIRDHUNAGAR.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20117 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77799&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Section 234E was brought in statute w.e.f. 1.7.2012 which provides for fee for default in furnishing statements where a person fails to deliver or cause to be delivered a statement within the time prescribed under section 200(3) or proviso to sub section (3) of section 206C. Section 234E cannot be read in isolation, because it only prescribes the mode of calculation of the fee and it has to be read with the mechanism and the mode provided for its enforcement, that is, the provision which imposes the fee.
PRAKASH INDUSTRIES LTD. VERSUS DCIT TDS-CPC NEW DELHI.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20116 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77801&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
There is no dispute as to the applicability of the Circular No. 17 of 2019, on pending appeals and, thus, tax effect involved in the appeal being less than the prescribed monetary limit of ₹ 50 Lakhs, the Department was required to withdraw this appeal or not pressed if not falling under exclusion provided in para 10 of circular No. 3/2018 as amended on 20/08/2018.
DCIT, CIRCLE-12 (1), NEW DELHI VERSUS M/S. G.K. DIARY & MILK PRODUCTS PVT. LTD. AND (VICE-VERSA)
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20115 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77807&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.