-
HC - Where the basis for referring the matter to Departmental Valuation Officer itself vitiates then it is liable to be quashed.
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL KANPUR VERSUS M/S GOPI APARTMENTS
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16865 (HC-ALLAHABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=76023&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - When option of sub-clause (i) [of Explanation (a)] has not been exercised, then Ld. CIT (A) cannot resort to apply the same and reject the substantiation provided in sub- clause (ii).
India Today Online Pvt. Ltd Vs ITO
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16864 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
ITAT - Finance Act, 2017 amendment to Sec. 23(5), is effective only from A.Y.2018-19 onwards and cannot be applied retrospectively. For AY 2012-13 no deemed rental income in hands of builder in respect of unsold flats.
Saranga Estates Pvt. Ltd Vs Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16863 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 23
-
ITAT - Merely because the assessee had claimed the expenditure, which was not accepted or was not acceptable to the revenue, that by itself would not, attract the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act.
DCIT, CIRLCE – 4 (1) (2), AHMEDABAD. VERSUS M/S. VINI COSMETICS PVT. LTD.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16862 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=71070&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Withdrawal of tax credit which was given in the assessment completed u/s 143(3) by resorting rectification proceedings u/s 154 is legally untenable (being debatable issue) and cannot be sustained.
SRI. A.M. FAZIL VERSUS THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE – 1 ALAPPUZHA.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16861 (ITAT-COCHIN) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=71071&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
S. 68 Bogus Share Capital: Merely presenting of documents & making payment through bank or appearance by director before the AO & admitting fact of share application made is in itself not sufficient to justify the genuineness of the transaction. It is against human probability that anyone will invest and pay share premium in a company without net worth or future prospectus. All applicants with common address are being controlled remotely by one person. These applicants are all paper companies not having sufficient worth and created for providing entries of share application money or share capital or loans by way of accommodation entries (NDR Promoter 410 ITR 379 (Del) & NRA Iron & Steel 103 TM.com 48 (SC) followed) INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
ITO vs. Synergy Finlease Pvt. Ltd
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16848 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 68
-
S. 50C Capital Gains: The adoption of stamp valuation as the sale consideration is not justified in absence of any evidence that the sale consideration was more than the value shown in the agreement. The AO has not brought on record that the property under sale was not was under various encumbrances and the assessee was having the absolute marketable title of the said property (All judgements considered)
Sir Mohd. Yusuf Trust vs. ACIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16847 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 50C
-
The insinuation of the Dept that ITAT passes order in a state of oblivion displays a totally irresponsible and cavalier approach on the cusp of contempt and deserving exemplary cost to purge the same. Referring in a deriding manner that the ITAT started with the grounds of appeal, displays the naivette of revenue authority purporting to be critical examiner of ITAT verdict, which is uncalled for. I express deep anguish at this approach of the department and hope that revenue will disband this cavalier and naïve approach while insinuating about the functioning of the ITAT without verifying their record
ITO vs. Rayoman Carriers Pvt. Ltd
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16846 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
S. 92C Transfer Pricing: It is mandatory for the AO to determine the arm's length price (ALP) of the international transactions by following one of the prescribed methods. He is not entitled to follow any other method or to resort to estimation. The failure to follow one of the prescribed methods makes the entire transfer pricing adjustment unsustainable in law. The legal infirmity cannot be cured by restoring the issue to the TPO. The TPO cannot be allowed another innings to rectify the mistake
CLSA India Private Limited vs. DCIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16845 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 92C
-
Defunct companies: The fact that the assessee company stands dissolved as a defunct company u/s 560(5) of the Companies Act, 1956 does not mean that income-tax proceedings & appeals become infructuous. The liability against such companies has to be dealt with in accordance with s. 506(5) proviso (a) of the Companies Act and Chapter XV of the Income Tax Act which deal with "liability in special cases" and "discontinuance of business or dissolution"
CIT vs. Gopal Shri Scrips Pvt. Ltd
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16844 (SC)
-
S. 147 Reopening of Bogus share capital: Though the reopening is based on information supplied by the investigation wing, the reasons do not specify that the investment was non-genuine. The AO cannot reopen to investigate into the source of genuineness and creditworthiness of the investors as it falls within the realm of fishing enquiries which is wholly impermissible in law
NuPower Renewables Pvt. Ltd vs. ACIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16843 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 147
-
HC - Reopening quashed - Subsequent year assessment does not form valid source of information to re-open assessment.
Precilion Holdings Limited Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,International Taxation -3(3)(2)
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16836 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
ITAT - In the year under consideration the transfer of land was from a non-urban area to a non-urban area and therefore, section 54G was not applicable.
M/S RAKO MERCANTILE TRADERS VERSUS DY. C.I.T., RANGE-4, LUCKNOW.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16812 (ITAT-LUCKNOW) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=70940&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Local Body Tax related to prior period is allowable u/s 43B even though no provision was made in the earlier years.
VINOD PAHUMAL RAMCHANDANI VERSUS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WAD 1 (2), SOLAPUR
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16811 (ITAT-PUNE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=70961&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - No addition u/s 56(2)(v) where assessee explained the position about the amount being loan which has not been controverted by the Revenue.
INCOME TAX OFFICER-1, RAJNANDGAON, (C.G) VERSUS BHUPENDRA KUMAR JAIN (HUF) AND (VICE-VERSA)
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16810 (ITAT-RAIPUR) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=70964&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - The Assessee cannot be denied an opportunity to raise his objections even against the presumptive Fair Market Value under Section 50C (1) or Report of DVO under Section 50C (2).
M/S. JAGANNATHAN SAILAJA CHITTA VERSUS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16809 (HC-MADRAS) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=75945&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Assessee was seeking to carry forward accumulated loses u/s 74 when admittedly it had not filed any return of income, claiming loses for the earlier Assessment Year under the Act and it was not an Assessee under the Act - AAR justified in answering the question in negative.
ABERDEEN INSTITUTIONAL COMMINGLED FUNDS LLC VERSUS THE AUTHORITY OF ADVANCE RULINGS (INCOME TAX), MUMBAI, DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) 1, MUMBAI.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16808 (HC-BOMBAY) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=75946&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - The action of the AO to pass the final order of assessment even before the period of four weeks had expired, cannot be approved.
M/S. ANKUR POWER PROJECT PVT. LTD. VERSUS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER 15 (1) (1) & ORS.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16807 (HC-BOMBAY) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=75948&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Scope for initiating special audit u/s. 142(2A) has been widened w.e.f. 1.6.2013 whereby such powers can be exercised in several situations.
Multi Commodity Exchange of India Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16806 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 142(2A)
-
S. 37(1)/40A(2) Business expenditure vs. sharing of profit: The AO has to take into account the manner in which the business works, the modalities and manner in which SAP/additional purchase price/final price are decided and determine what amount forms part of the profit. Whatever is the profit component is sharing of profit/distribution of profit and the rest is deductible as expenditure
CIT vs. Tasgaon Taluka S.S.K. Ltd
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16805 (SC) · Section 37(1)/40A(2)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.