-
ITAT - There is no sufficient reason to deviate from the appellate orders of the CIT(A) of the earlier years allowing the exemption u/s. 11(1) and accordingly, the AO was directed to allow the exemption u/s. 11(1).
DCIT (E), CIRCLE 2 (1), New Delhi Versus PHD Chamber of Commerce And Industry
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13613 (ITAT-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=58040&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
SC - As per Finance Act, 2017 amendment to Sec. 132A, the Income Tax Authority shall not disclose the 'reason to believe' or 'reason to suspect', as recorded u/s. 132/132A, to any person or any authority. Block assessment upheld.
N. K. Jewellers vs. CIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13612 (SC)
-
HC - Not correct to hold that Sec. 153(2A) limitation applied only where there was complete setting aside of assessment and not when the proceedings were remanded to AO with directions from ITAT and covered only few issues.
Nokia India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13611 (HC-DELHI) · Section. 153(2A)
-
ITAT - Even if there is delay in filing return u/s 148, Sec. 54F exemption cannot be denied.
Amina Ismil Rangari vs. ITO
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13610 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section. 148
-
SC - Enhanced compensation alongwith interest received by assessee-HUF pursuant to HC’s interim order in pending appeals, is taxable in the year of receipt.
Chet Ram (HUF) vs. CIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13609 (SC)
-
S. 271(1)(c) penalty: Voluntary disclosure of Rs. 557.50 crores. Entire law on levy of penalty discussed in the context of declaration made during survey, bogus purchases, bogus share capital, accommodation entries, non-application of mind by the AO etc. All important judgements incl Kaushalya 216 ITR 660 (Bom), MAK Data 358 ITR 593 (SC) explained/ ditinguished
Uttam Value Steels Limited vs. ACIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13608 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section. 271(1)(c)
-
S. 115-O Dividend Distribution Tax: Entire law on the constitutional validity of Dividend Distribution Tax (DDT) under Article 246 of the Constitution read with Entry 82 of List I and Entry 46 of List II in the Seventh Schedule and whether tea companies are liable for the tax on only 40% of the dividend income explained
UOI. vs. Tata Tea Co. Ltd.
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13607 (SC) · Section. 115-O
-
ITAT - CIT had gathered that the loan from assessee's mother was utilized for payment to another entity and not to the seller of property, therefore revision u/s 263 justified.
Parth Ajit Pawar vs. Pr. CIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13606 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section. 263
-
HC - Waiver of interest u/s 234C not upheld as assessee can not contend that it could not anticipate the accrual of income u/s 115JB.
M/s. CANBANK FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD., (WHOLLY OWNED SUBSIDIARY OF CANARA BANK) Versus CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BENGALURU
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13605 (HC-KARNATAKA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=69992&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - No rejection of books of accounts u/s 145(3) at the instance of the assessee since there is nothing in the said provisions that empowers the assessee to request the AO to reject his books of accounts.
The ITO, Ward-2 (1), Kota Versus Shri Babu Lal Somani, Prop. M/s Somani & Company and Somani Carrier
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13604 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=57957&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - In case of pure reimbursement of expenses incurred and no service element is involved, the transaction to be treated at ALP and adjustment to be made at Rs. Nil.
M/s. Avineon India P. Ltd. Versus Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1 (1), Hyderabad And Vice-Versa
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13603 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=57949&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Levy of penalty u/s 271BA justified for failure to furnish report in form No. 3CEB as required u/s 92E r/w rule 10E since mere ignorance and bonafide belief is not reasonable cause to delete the penalty.
Karvy Computershare Pvt. Ltd. Versus Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax, Hyderabad
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13602 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=57948&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Interest u/s 234C is to be charged on the returned income and not on assessed income.
Morgan Stanley Investment Management Private Limited Versus Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax – 1 (2), Mumbai
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13601 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=57935&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - In case of sale of right to develop and sell incentive FSI under LOI, no accrual of income till the conditions of LOI are fulfilled as there is no transfer.
Jawahar B. Purohit, M/s M.R. Construction Versus Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax And Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-22, Mumbai And Vice-Versa
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13600 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=57934&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - No TP adjustment by applying Bright Line Test (BLT) since the same is not sustainable on protective basis having no statutory mandate.
M/s. Nikon India Pvt. Ltd. Versus DCIT, Circle 3 (1) , Gurgaon
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13599 (ITAT-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=57932&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) not applicable in the case of legal luminary & Senior Advocate as there is no malafide intention to conceal income or furnish inaccurate particulars.
Harish Narinder Salve vs. ACIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13598 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
SC - Constitutional validity of dividend distribution levy (DDT- Sec. 115 O) on Tea Companies affirmed.
Tata Tea Co. Ltd. & Anr. vs. Union Of India & Ors
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13597 (SC)
-
ITAT - Rule 8D(2) with respect to Sec. 14A inapplicable as in absence of failure by AO to establish nexus between the exempt income and the impugned expenditure.
Leena Kasbekar vs. ACIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13596 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section. 14A
-
ITAT - Sec. 54G, being a benevolent provision should be interpreted liberally and there is no precondition that new machinery should be purchased at the time of shifting of industrial undertaking. Most important and decisive factor for claiming the deduction is ‘transfer’ of capital asset.
Everest Industries Ltd. vs. ACIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13595 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section. 54G
-
40(a)(ia)/40(ba) Disallowance of reimbursement of salary for non-deduction of TDS: Displeasure and unhappiness expressed at the manner in which the Tribunal approached the matter insofar as the applicability of s. 40(ba) is concerned. Tribunal cautioned that it should not use abbreviations in the order without indicating what the terms stand for as it causes confusion
CIT vs. ITD CEM India JV
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13594 (HC-BOMBAY) · Sections 40(a)(ia), 40(ba)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.