-
ITAT - When the existence of the stated outstanding liability is found to be bogus, the addition is to be upheld on account of the said bogus liability.
M/s. UB Air Pvt. Ltd. Versus DCIT – 5 (3), Mumbai
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11567 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=52319&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - The proceedings before Sales Tax Department alone could not be the sole basis of addition in the hands of assessee before Income Tax Authorities. No addition u/s 69 since the machinery was duly recorded in the books of accounts.
Shree Sai Krupa Ispat Pvt. Ltd. Versus Income Tax Officer
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11566 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=52320&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) justified on addition of unexplained sundry creditor of bogus purchases. Non-payment of purchase consideration is a strong circumstance regarding non-genuineness of transactions.
M/s Unicons India (P) Ltd., C/o A.B. Mitra Vesus Income Tax Officer, Ward-18 (1), New Delhi
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11565 (ITAT-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=52325&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
S. 55(2): In determining the cost of acquisition as on 01.04.1974 (or 01.04.1981), the value declared in the wealth-tax return as well as the comparable sales, even if later in point of time, have to be considered. The High Court should not interfere with findings of fact, unless palpably incorrect
Ashok Prapann Sharma vs. CIT
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11564 (SC) · Section 55(2)
-
HC - Provision of Section 115J does not empower AO to embark upon a fresh inquiry in regard to the entries made in the books of account of the company.
The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Versus M/s J.K. Synthetics Ltd.
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11563 (HC-ALLAHABAD) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=66853&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Reimbursement of expenses or payment towards product development fees is FTS. TDS u/s 195 applicable.
M/s. Stempeutics Research Pvt. Ltd. Bangalore Versus Joint Director of Income Tax, Range 1, Bangalore.
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11562 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=52304&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Presumption u/s. 292C is a rebuttal presumption and is limited to the correctness of the documents found at the time of search or survey, but not extended to be presumed to be the income of the assessee.
M/s HABITAT ROYALE PROJECTS PVT. LTD Versus ACIT, CC-22, NEW DELHI
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11561 (ITAT-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=52308&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Interest paid but not shown as deductible expenditure for the previous period should be permitted as prior period expenditure.
Commissioner Of Income Tax Delhi Versus M/s. Nav Sansar Agro Products
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11560 (HC-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=66860&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Deduction u/s 10A to be granted on enhanced profits pursuant to disallowance u/s 40(a).
Patni Telecom Solutions P. Ltd. vs. ITO
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11559 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · Section. 10A
-
ITAT - Determination of annual value of property let out by assessee to its sister concern should be based on notional interest’ on security deposit received by assessee.
Sobha Interiors Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11558 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
-
ITAT - Expenditure incurred for sponsoring of special box to watch cricket match is not allowable as business promotion expenditure as it is difficult to imagine how 15 persons sitting in an air-conditioned box and watching a cricket match would help the business of the assessee.
M/s Sumeru Soft Pvt. Ltd Vresus The Income Tax Officer, Company Ward VI (1), Chennai
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11557 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=52262&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Addition u/s 68 for the reason that the denomination of notes withdrawn and re-deposited was different is not valid.
Smt. Shveta Aggarwal Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward-20 (4), New Delhi
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11556 (ITAT-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=52264&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Compensation to flat owners for delay in handing over of possession was in the course of business, hence not a penalty. Allowed u/s 37(1).
Kamdhenu Real Estate’s Pvt. Ltd. Versus ACIT, Circle 11 (1), Pune
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11555 (ITAT-PUNE) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=52267&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Minor contribution from non-members which has been offered for taxation, would not destroy the principle of mutuality in case of a society.
The Gujarat Institute of Housing and Estate Developers Versus DDIT, Exemption Ahmedabad
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11554 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=52274&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Addition u/s 68 cannot be made on the basis of loose paper in coded word as explanation given by the assessee is a plausible one. It cannot be brushed aside without giving any specific reasons.
Shri Sanjay R. Shah Versus ITO, Ward-3 (4), Surat.
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11553 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=51098&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Disallowance cannot be made by the A.O on the ground that expenses are not authorized by the partnership deed.
Remfry and Sagar Remfry House Versus JCIT, Range-37, New Delhi, DCIT, Range-37 (1), New Delhi and Vica-Versa and ACIT, Circle-37 (1), New Delhi
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11552 (ITAT-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=52249&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Payment in cash for purchase of agricultural commodities is covered by Rule 6DD(e) of the Rules. Without bringing any material on record of the purchases being not verifiable, the Assessing Officer could not have resorted to make an ad-hoc disallowance.
Chand Fruit Company Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range–2, Sangli
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11551 (ITAT-PUNE) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=52255&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Once in terms of section 10(6)(viii) the salary paid to non-resident cannot be taxed in India then reimbursement of salary cannot be treated as FTS under Article 12(5) of Indian- Netherlands Treaty.
Van Oord Dredging and Marine Contractors BV Versus Addl. Director of Income-tax (International Taxation) -Range-2, Mumbai
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11550 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=52260&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Assessee could not furnish any vital evidences to establish the genuineness of the agricultural income. Additions confirmed.
Pratap Ratan Das, Mumbai Versus Income Tax Officer 14 (1) (4) 17, Mumbai
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11549 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=52224&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Computation of profit and determination of taxable income is one aspect which is different from apportionment of profit / income between the AOP members.
M/s Fortaleza Developers Versus ITO, 15 (1) (3), Mumbai and ACIT, 17 (1), Mumbai
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11548 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=52225&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.