-
ITAT - Since no installation activity happened during the relevant AY, PO did not constitute installation PE, therefore profits arising out of off-shore supply of equipments was not taxable in India.
HITT Holland Institute of Traffic Technology B.V. vs DDIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12113 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
-
ITAT - If assessee determines the ALV of the vacant property and offer such notional income, assessee will be eligible for the claim of deduction u/s 24(b) on account of interest on borrowed capital.
Anagha Estates Ltd. vs. DCIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12112 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 24(b)
-
ITAT - Once the certificate u/s 197(2) is issued for lesser/no TDS deduction, the person making the payment is at liberty to deduct tax at rates specified in the certificate and it does not make any reference to any income specified in such certificate.
Twenty First Century Securities Ltd. Vs I.T.O.
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12111 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · Sections 197, 201(1A)
-
ITAT - In absence of specific FTS article under India-Thailand DTAA, payment for FTS to Thailand based entities by an Indian company would not be treated as FTS. Residuary-clause 22 cannot be pressed into service in respect of the said income.
DCIT vs Ford India Limited
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12110 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
-
ITAT -No TDS u/s 194H on payment made by the assessee to the Hawkers.
Abhijit Majumder Versus Income Tax Officer Ward- 4, Nadia
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12109 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54451&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Annual Lettable Value of the shops which were ready to be let out during the year but remained vacant throughout the year would be "NIL".
Mrs. Neelam Sanjay Arya Versus ITO, Wd-8 (3), Ahmedabad
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12107 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54454&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - There has to be some benefit directly or indirectly to the organisation to claim expenditure u/s 37(1).
Dr. Reddy’s Research Foundation Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12106 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=53682&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Benefit of Section 54F could be granted u/s 264 when it was originally not claimed during the assessment proceedings.
Rajesh Kumar Aggarwal Versus Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi-VIII & Another
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12105 (HC-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=68414&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Relief under clause (iic) to Explanation 1 to Sec 115JB inserted vide Finance Act, 2015 excluding AOP profits from MAT be applied retrospectively.
Goldgerg Finance Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12103 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
ITAT - No Sec 80IB(10) deduction to a builder who was engaged in construction business as a ‘work contractor’ and not ‘developer’.
Arihant Heirloom vs ITO
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12102 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Section 80-IB(10)
-
SC - SLP Dismissed - HC had held that Department cannot initiate Sec 201 proceedings for a period more than four years.
ACIT(TDS) vs. Tata Teleservices Ltd.
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12101 (SC)
-
S. 80-IB(10): The profits of an undertaking eligible for deduction cannot be treated as "inflated" in the absence of material on record to show that there is an arrangement between the eligible unit and the non-eligible unit to generate more than ordinary profits for the eligible unit. The mere fact that there are common customers of both the units does not by itself indicate transfer of profits to the eligible unit
Malay N. Sanghvi vs. ITO
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12100 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 80-IB(10)
-
S. 254(2): Plea that the appeal was mistakenly withdrawn on the advice of Counsel and that the same should be restored should be backed by evidence. If the assessee voluntarily withdraws the appeal, he cannot seek restoration on the ground that the withdrawal was an apparent mistake
Jayant D. Sanghavi vs. ITAT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12099 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 254(2)
-
ITAT - Since the mistake of quoting wrong PAN has been rectified in the revised TDS return, no justification in raising a demand on account of short deduction of TDS.
State Bank of Patiala Versus DCIT (TDS) CPC, Ghaziabad
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12098 (ITAT-INDORE) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54424&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Addition on account of undisclosed current assets was part of gross receipt and as shown income in the profit and loss account, thus, it can not become an addition again bringing the same for taxation for not following the principles of accountancy.
Susanta Biswas Versus Income Tax Officer Ward 50 (4), Kolkata
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12097 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54425&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Forfeiture of entrance fee received from members would remain capital in nature since the amount was in the nature of deposits, i.e., capital receipts.
Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax Versus Royal Western India Turf Club Ltd. (And Vice Versa)
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12096 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=53586&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Making false claim made towards interest deduction while computing income from house property is not a fit case for levy of 300% penalty, but to levy minimum penalty i.e. 100% u/s 271(1)(c).
Shri Sujata Hemlal Bakhre Versus ITO WD 8 (3) (1), Mumbai
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12095 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54428&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - When executives are employed and the infrastructure is ready to commence business, it can be said that the business has been set up.
The Commissioner of Income Tax-3, Mumbai Versus M/s. Axis Pvt. Equity Ltd.
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12093 (HC-BOMBAY) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=68391&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Transfer Pricing - Meaning of “Associated Enterprises”: The fact that an enterprise can “influence prices and other conditions relating to sale” does not make it an “associated enterprise” of the assessee if it does not participate in the (a) capital, (b) management, or (c) control of the assessee and thus does not fulfil the basic rule u/s 92A(1). S. 92A(2)(i) has to be read with s. 92(A)(1). Even if the conditions of s. 92A(2)(i) are fulfilled, these enterprise cannot be treated as ‘associated enterprise’ if the requirements of s. 92A(1) are not fulfilled
Orchid Pharma Limited vs. DCIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12090 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Section 92A(1)
-
S. 68: Even if the premium at which the shares are issued defies commercial prudence, the receipt cannot be assessed as "unexplained credit" if the identity of the payer, genuineness of the transaction and capacity of the subscriber are not disputed. Interest earned on short-term fixed deposits is assessable as "profits and gains of business" and not as "income from other sources"
CIT vs. Green Infra Limited
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12089 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 68
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.