-
It is the practice in the business to hand over the collection as soon as the film is screened. Therefore the assessee is forced to pay the amount collected from the theatres on Sunday night itself after screening the film when the banks are closed. Hence the exclusion prescribed under Rule 6DD.2(j) of the Rules is applicable in the case of the assessee for the payment made during the period when the Bank do not function. For the above stated reason we hereby direct the Ld.AO to delete the addition made by invoking the provision of Section 40A(3) of the Act.
M/S. NVR CINEMA VERSUS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON CORPORATE WARD – 20 (5) , CHENNAI.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20074 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77617&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The assessee manifested its intention of change of user from business to that of giving these properties on rent for longer period of time wherein doctrine of supervening impossibility had set in preventing business user of these properties for the purposes of business of the assessee.
M/S. EMCO DYESTUFF PRIVATE LTD. VERSUS DCIT 12 (2) (1) , MUMBAI
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20073 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77626&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
No order for the arrest and detention in civil prison of a defaulter shall be made unless the Tax Recovery Officer has issued and served a notice upon the defaulter calling upon him to appear before him on the date specified in the notice and to show cause as to why he should not be committed to civil prison, unless the Tax Recovery Officer is satisfied for the reasons which are mentioned in clause (a) and (b) of sub-rule (1) of Rule 73 of Schedule II of the Act.
LALITH KUMAR RAMANI VERSUS RECOVERY OFFICER, BENGALURU
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20072 (HC-KARNATAKA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79864&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
It is clear that an illegal set off was sought to be claimed by the respondent (which probably succeeded because of the misleading appellation of the property in the dispute viz. 'Gupta House'). We set aside the finding of the Tribunal that there were no reasons for Assessing Officer to believe that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment.
THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GURGAON VERSUS SHRI AMIT GUPTA
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20071 (HC-P&H) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79866&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
There is no allegation against the assessee before us that they had concealed particulars of their income. However, the allegation is inaccurate particulars have been furnished. AO while completing the assessment vide order dated 01.12.2011, does not record any finding that the particulars given by the assessee in the return of income is incorrect or inaccurate, but the conclusion of the AO is based upon an interpretation of the legal position and held that tax is payable under Section 115JB.
M/S. VINAY AUTOPARTS P. LTD. VERSUS THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, COMPANY WARD 3 (1) , 121, CHENNAI
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20070 (HC-MADRAS) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79868&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
In First Appellate proceedings has enhanced GP addition by extrapolating sales for the month of October, 1997 to the entire year. The contentions of the assessee is that October being the month of Diwali festival the sales are at peak. Hence, sales during festival months/seasons cannot be extrapolated to the entire year. We find merit in the contentions of the assessee.
M/S. NANCHAND & CO., SHAH KHANDELWAL JAIN & ASSOCIATES, CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE – 2 (2) , PUNE, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE – 2 (2) , PUNE
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20069 (ITAT-PUNE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77640&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
If instead of making a high pitched assessment the AO, in his wisdom, has thought it fit to get the material verified by an accountant, no fault can be found in the action of the Assessing Officer in referring the matter for special audit under sub-section (2A) of section 142 of the Act.
TEHMUL BURJOR SETHNA Vs ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1)
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20068 (HC-GUJARAT)
-
There is no obligation on the assessee to spend any definite amount every year. Merely mentioning that it will act on the non-profit basis does not make the income received by the assesse diverted by overriding title.
Yum! Restaurants Marketing Pvt. Ltd Vs ITO
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20067 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
Where the assessment order forming the basis of proceedings under section 263 are themselves invalid, the order passed u/s 263 cannot survive and it is also a nullity. No decision to the contrary has been cited.
SHRI RAVINDRA KHEMKA VERSUS DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE II KANPUR
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20066 (ITAT-LUCKNOW) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77602&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
We not convinced with the arguments that the assessee inadvertently failed to disclose the second sale deed in the return of income. There is no plausible explanation offered by the assessee in this respect. Had the AO not got the information from Departmental sources, the assessee would have left un-assessed in respect of the second sale deed and thereby evasion of due taxes.
SH. SACHIN MARKAN VERSUS THE ITO, WARD-SIRHIND
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20065 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77608&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
It is a case where in the seized documents, the aforesaid transactions were recorded, which when being confronted to the assessee, he explained about the mode and manner of earning of such income, which duly stood substantiated in the shape of the documents found during search action. It is not a case where any unaccounted income in the shape of cash or otherwise, was found, of which the assessee could not explain the source, or to say, specify the mode and manner of the earning. In view of this, as per the provisions of section 271AAA the assessee’s case squarely falls within the exceptional clauses of sub-section (2) of section 271AAA.
THE A.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, CHANDIGARH. VERSUS M/S HALCYON LIFE SCIENCES PVT. LTD. AND M/S IND SWIFT LABORATORIES LTD. VERSUS THE A.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, CHANDIGARH. AND THE D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, CHANDIGARH VERSUS M/S IND SWIFT LABORATORIES LTD.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20064 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77614&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
There is no reason to hold that the activity of dehusking of paddy into rice will not amount to “manufacture or production” and there is no justification to give a narrower meaning to these terms. The assessee is entitled for claim of deduction u/s.80IB(11A) of the Act. AO was not correct in disallowing the benefit of Section 80IB(11A) to the assessee and, thus, the CIT(A) was not also correct and justified in confirming the disallowance made by the AO. Sole ground of assessee is allowed and the AO is directed to allow the deduction as claimed by the assessee u/s.80IB(11A).
M/S AADHAR RICE MILLS PVT. LTD., C/O SRI VINAY KUMAR JALAN, M/S O.P. JALAN AND ASSOCIATES CONSULTANTS LLP VERSUS ITO, WARD-1 (1) , RANCHI
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20063 (ITAT-RANCHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77596&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The intention of the legislature for giving the exemption u/s 80IB(11A) is to promote agro processing industries as is evident from the Finance Ministers speech and also memorandum explaining the amendments to the bill. There is no doubt that oil palm fresh fruit bunches are agricultural products. They may not be edible in their raw or ripe form, but they extract therefore after processing is edible. The language used in the section itself is processing, preservation and packaging of fruits or vegetables. Thus, the legislature was aware of the fact that certain fruits and vegetables would require processing and preservation for their long shelf-life. As long as the end product is also consumable it cannot be denied exemption u/s 80IB(11A). Therefore we are satisfied that the oil palm fruits are fruits u/s 80IB(11A) of the Act.
3F OIL PALM AGROTECH PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2 (2) , HYDERABAD
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20062 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77598&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
There was tenure of license/product but there was no certainty that in every subsequent year some determinate service had to be provided by it, that there was no determined/committed expenditure which the assessee was required to incur in the future years towards the corresponding share of revenue, that the indeterminate event of providing of updates and services as and when the they were developed which had been in keeping with the industrial norm.
CA (INDIA) TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD. VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, RANGE 10 (1)
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20061 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77606&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Provisional attachment u/s 281B of income tax refund of Rs. 180 cr. arising to Vodafone Idea Ltd. pursuant to processing of return u/s. 143(1) for AY 2016-17 is quashed.
Vodafone Idea Ltd. Vs Dy. Commissioner of income Tax, CPC, Bangalore & Ors.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20060 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
The language of Article 22(3) is unambiguous. What falls within its ambit is only income received from lotteries, crossword puzzles, races including horse races, card games and other games of any sort or gambling or betting of any nature. Amounts received by the decree holder as compensation, towards breach of contract cannot fall within its ambit.
Xstrata Coal Marketing AG Vs Dalmia Bharat (Cement) Ltd
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20059 (HC-DELHI)
-
It is a settled position in law that before commencing the reassessment proceedings under Section 147/148 of the Act, the recorded reasons have to be given to the parties and its objections to it is considered and disposed of by an order. This is in accord what the directions of the Apex Court in GKN Driveshaft. Therefore, in the normal course an reassessment order without furnishing of reasons in support of the reopening notice would be set aside following the decision of this Court in CIT v/s. VSNL.
ASHOK HOTCHAND ADVANI VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -17 (1) (2) AND ORS.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20058 (HC-BOMBAY) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79847&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
This court after a careful analyse of rival submissions and the case law is convinced that the submission of learned Revenue counsel that Southern Petrochemical case is distinguishable deserves to be accepted for more than one reason, as Southern Petrochemical case turns on section 144B which is different from section 144C which we are now concerned with, more importantly the facts scenario is completely different.
WORLDPART LTD. VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20057 (HC-MADRAS) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79848&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Authorities below has taken contradictory stand meaning thereby the Revenue on one hand has accepted the liability shown by the assessee as discussed above and on the other hand the forex losses in relation to such trading liability was not allowed as deduction. Once the Revenue has accepted trading liability shown by the assessee, then the Revenue cannot make the disallowance of the corresponding loss in relation to such advance being a trading asset.
DIAMINES & CHEMICALS LTD. VERSUS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 (1) (2) BARODA
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20056 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77586&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Condition prescribed is that the eligible unit should begin to manufacture or produce articles/things or provide any services during the previous year relevant to any assessment year commencing on or after 01-04-2006. The previous year for the assessment year 2006-07 is the financial year 1-04-2005 to 31-03-2006, meaning thereby, the manufacture/production etc., should be commenced from 01-04-2005 onwards. In the instant case, the assessee has commenced its operation on 31-10-2005.
M/S. ADVANCE GRP COOLING TOWERS PVT. LTD. VERSUS I.T.O., 12 (1) (1) ,
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20055 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77557&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.