-
ITAT - It cannot be believee that any non-related party will given loan of ₹ 50 lakh without taking any interest, hence CIT(A) rightly estimated interest @1% per month (i.e. 12% per year simple interest rate).
ITO, WARD 5 (2), NEW DELHI Versus M/s KATHURIA CASTING (P) LTD. AND VICE-VERSA
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 11863 (ITAT-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54017&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Processes adopted by the Respondent Assessee to obtain front guard, luggage, carrier, rear gear etc. were manufacturing processes. Eligible for deduction u/s 80IC.
Commissioner of Income Tax 20, Mumbai Versus M/s. Kumar Auto Sales
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 11862 (HC-BOMBAY) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=68198&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - No additio u/s sec. 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of TDS while making payment on account of commission as the said commission was paid to his staff.
M/s D.D. Infotech Versus ITO, Ward-50 (1), Kolkata
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 11861 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54022&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Merely interest has been disallowed does not mean that the assessee has filed inaccurate particulars of income. Also there is no finding that any details furnished by the assessee in its return were found to be incorrect or false.
M/s. Twenty First Century Securities Ltd Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward 4 (I), Kolkata
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 11860 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54025&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - The explanation filed by the assessee about not disclosing interest income in the return of income was not bona fide, therefore levy of concealment penalty confirmed.
Suvratanand S. Haridas Versus The ACIT, Circle-26 (1), Mumbai
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 11859 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54026&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - No TDS u/s 195 as payment to Non-Resident for online access to the database system was not in the nature of royalty.
Income Tax Officer (International Taxation) -I, Ahmedabad Versus Cadila Healthcare Limited
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11858 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=53980&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Charitable objects can also be promoted with own efforts and by donating other trust having charitable objects. Benefit of exemption 11 available.
Thermax Social Initiative Foundation Versus Income-tax Officer (Exemptions) Ward-1, Pune
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11857 (ITAT-PUNE) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=53868&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - In the cases of public sector companies, even as all or majority of shareholdings may be by the Union or State Governments, these companies, for that reason alone, cannot be said to be associated enterprises for the purposes of Section 92A.
Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4, Ahmedabad Versus Hazira LNG Private Limited
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11856 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=53981&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - No penalty u/s 271(1)(c) where addition was made on protected assessment/addition on estimated basis.
Sheela Jain Versus ITO, Ward 39 (5), New Delhi
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11855 (ITAT-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=53923&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Absence of receipt of any reply from the suppliers cannot by itself demonstrate any bogus claim unless any of the attendant facts bear out any bogus nature of the claim of expenditure. No disallowance of alleged unverified purchases/expenditure.
M/s. Simplex Casting Ltd. Versus DCIT (OSD) -3 (1), Mumbai and Vice-Verssa
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11854 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=53983&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Rental receipts from letting out commercial properties is assessable under the head income from profits & gains of business or profession and not as income from house property.
Sri Bharathi Ware Housing Corporation Versus CIT (A), Guntur
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 11846 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=53977&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Section 44BB is a complete code in itself and the amount received, be it by way of reimbursement, is not, in any way, excluded from the ambit of Section 44BB.
M/s Ensco Maritime Ltd. Versus Additional Director of Income Tax
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 11845 (HC-UTTARAKHAND) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=68171&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Since purchases too were made outside the books of account and proper accounting or reconciliation could not be made by the assessee, the value of the investment and the estimated profits on the basis of the undisputed rate i.e. 4.5 % GP had to be adopted.
CIT Versus M/s Kuwer Fibres (P) Ltd
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 11844 (HC-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=68173&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Writing “I am satisfied that it is a fit case for issue of notice u/s 148”, is proper application of mind by the sanctioning authority.
Sh. Virbhadra Singh, Smt. Pratibha Singh, Sh. Vikramaditya Singh Versus Deputy Commissioner, Circle Shimla, Income Tax Office & Others
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 11842 (HC-HP) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=68176&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Merely because for the previous three years, the assessee has shown surpluses, it cannot be said that the activities of the assessee were in the nature of commercial enterprises. Renewal of approval u/s 80G(5) / 12AA granted.
The Commissioner of Income Tax-I Kanpur Versus Dr. Virendra Swaroop Educational Foundation
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 11841 (HC-ALLAHABAD) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=68179&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Assessee had incorrectly claimed set-off of its income based on a legal opinion received from a CA firm, therefore no Sec 271(1)(c) penalty.
Pr. CIT. vs. Atotech India Ltd.
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 11840 (HC-P&H) · Section. 271(1)(c
-
ITAT - AO collected necessary details, examined the same and then framed the assessment u/s. 143(3), hence revision u/s 263 was not warranted.
People Interactive (I) Private Ltd. vs. DCIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 11839 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Sections. 263, 10
-
ITAT - Since opinion of the departmental authorities on applicability of section 194J to payment of bandwidth charges are also different, therefore the assessment order cannot be held to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of revenue.
M/s My Guru Online Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Income tax, Vijayawada, Income-tax Officer – 2 (1), Vijayawada
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 11838 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=53952&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Belated filing of return of income by the assessee does not disentitle it from the benefit of deduction u/s 80P(2).
M/s Karuvanthiruthy Service Cooperative Bank Versus The Income tax Officer
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 11837 (ITAT-COCHIN) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=53963&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - No TDS u/s 194J on payments made by a Foreign Airline company for common utility terminal charges as the same constitutes a payment for ‘facility’ and not fees for technical service.
Singapore Airlines Ltd. Vs. ITO
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 11835 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.