-
HC - Assessee having got 15 flats along with his two sons will not disentitle him from getting the benefit u/s 54-F only on the ground that all the 15 flats are not in the same Block, particularly when all the 15 flats are located at the same address.
Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Shri Gumanmal jain
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12320 (HC-MADRAS) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=68625&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Since on termination of the licence agreement, all rights created in favour of the assessee under the licence agreement stood extinguished, expenditure towards royalty and fee for technical assistance were revenue in nature.
Commissioner of Income Tax, Noida Versus H-One India Pvt. Ltd.
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12318 (HC-ALLAHABAD) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=68627&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Generating surplus year after year is not the deciding factor to determine eligibility u/s 11 and what is relevant to examine is whether the surplus so generated is ploughed back in furthance of its educational objectives and related activities or not.
ACIT (Exemption) vs. Mahima Shiksha Samiti
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12317 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · Section. 11
-
ITAT - ‘Retainership fees’ payment under the service contract is ‘salary’ and TDS u/s 192 applicable.
Red Chillies Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12316 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Sections. 192, 194J
-
ITAT - Where assessee was registered as an AOP of Corporations which are Japanese companies and came together for construction project, then assessee cannot be treated as a foreign company in terms of Sec. 144C(15).
Mitsui Marubeni Corporation vs. DDIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12315 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section. 144C(15)
-
SC - SLP Dismissed - HC had held that no rectification u/s 154 for matters decided in appeal.
Indus Finance Corporation Ltd. vs. CIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12314 (SC)
-
ITAT - No addition u/s 41 where the matter is in dispute and sub-judice, therefore assessee cannot be expected to get a confirmation from the creditor.
ITO 2 (1) (1) Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai Versus ALFA Distilleries Pvt. Ltd.
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12313 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54837&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - No penalty levied u/s 271C as transaction by the assessee on principal to principal basis does not attract TDS u/s 194H/194J.
JCIT (OSD), TDS Circle-1, Visakhapatnam Versus M/s. National Mineral Development Corporation
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12311 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54838&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Sec. 292BB of the Act can cure only were a notice is claimed by a assessee not to have been served on him or served on him out of time or served in an improper manner. It cannot cure a situation were there was no issue of notices u/s.148 or u/s.143(2).
Shri. Deen Dayal Kothari Versus The Income Tax Officer, Business Ward VIII (3), Chennai
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12310 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54840&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - The interest income earned on deposits made with other co-operative banks/society are fully deductible u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) from the income liable to tax though the assessee has claimed the same as exempt u/ s. 80P(2) (d) and the same is also exempt u/ s. 80P(2)(d).
The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Shivamogga Versus M/s. Malnadu Credit Co-operative Society Ltd.,
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12309 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54841&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Provision of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act are applicable not only to the amounts which is shown as payable on the date of balance sheet but it is applicable to such expenditure which becomes payable at any time during the relevant previous year and was actually paid within the previous year.
I.T.O., Ward-8 (3) , Kolkata Versus M/s. Ruia Sons Pvt. Ltd. Kolkata
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12308 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54843&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Provisions for interest on turnover tax is determined as an ascertained liability and once it is so, the same cannot be added to the book profit u/s. 115J.
Kesoram Industries Limited (Successor of Hindustan Heavy Chemicals Ltd.) Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle-X, Kolkata, Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-4, Kolkata
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12307 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54845&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Capital gain u/s 45 arises in the year of execution of deed and not when the same was registered with the office of the Sub-Registrar.
RAJENDRA KANTILAL PATEL Versus INCOME TAX OFFICER
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12306 (HC-GUJARAT) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=68599&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Statements of two farmers upon which reliance was placed by the Department were not furnished/given to the assessee to controvert the same. No addition u/s. 69B for unexplained investment in land.
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AHMEDABAD 3 Versus KANUBHAI MAGANLAL PATEL
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12305 (HC-GUJARAT) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=68602&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Where income and assets are disclosed in the books of account and no incriminating material is found during search and seizure, addition in the block assessment not justified.
Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi (central-I) Versus Pinaki Misra & Sangeeta Misra
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12304 (HC-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=68608&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
S. 9(1)(vii)/ Article 12: In order to constitute “technical services”, services catering to the special needs of the person using them must be rendered. The provision of a common facility is not “technical services”. Amount paid towards reimbursement of a common technical computer facility is not “fees for technical services”. Amount received by way of reimbursement of expenses does not have the character of income
DIT vs. A. P. Moller Maersk AS
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12303 (SC) · Section 9(1)(vii)
-
HC - Absence of any material seized during the search proceeding could not have justified afresh examination of the valuation issue.
Anita Rani Vs. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12302 (HC-DELHI)
-
ITAT - No disallowance u/s 40A(3) where payments were made in cash to land owners to develop the land, where there is no banking facilities.
M/s PCR Developers (P) Ltd. Versus Dy. Commissioner of Incometax, Circle – 16 (3), Hyderabad and vice-Verssa
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12301 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54821&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - No addition of unexplained purchases u/s 68 on the basis of a witness who examined at the back of the assessee.
Veda Commercial Pvt. Ltd. Versus Addl. CIT, Range-10, Kolkata, Income Tax Officer, Kolkata
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12300 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54822&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Expenditure of software stock and maintenance charges is a revenue expenditure.
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II Versus H NYALCHAND FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12299 (HC-GUJARAT) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=68591&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.