-
S. 271B: The requirement in s. 44AB that the the tax audit report has to be obtained "before" the specified date has to be interpreted to mean "on or before" the specified date. So, even if the audit report is obtained "on" the specified date, there is no default
Chopra Properties vs. ACIT
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 9448 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 271B
-
S. 115JB: Even a non-taxable capital receipt credited to the P&L A/c cannot be excluded while computing the book profits. The fact that the notes to the A/cs state that the receipt is on capital account is irrelevant. Shivalik Venture distinguished
B & B Infotech Ltd vs. ITO
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 9447 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 115JB
-
Failure to give the assessee the right to cross-examine witnesses whose statements are relied up results in breach of principles of natural justice. It is a serious flaw which renders the order a nullity
Andaman Timber Industries vs. CCE
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 9446 (SC)
-
SC - SLP Dismissed - Karnataka HC had rejected denial of deduction based on 'window dressing' accounts and held that benefit could not be denied as there was no intention to avoid tax.
CIT vs. Karnataka Soaps And Detergents Ltd.
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 9435 (SC)
-
ITAT - MAT not applicable to a power generation co. for AYs 2005-06 to 2008-09, as the same being governed by special Act.
BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd vs. ACIT
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 9434 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 40A(2)
-
ITAT - Consideration received by an individual for relinquishing his rights over trademark jointly owned with assignee by way of family arrangement is a non-taxable capital receipt.
D.S. Thakur vs. ITO
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 9433 (ITAT-PUNE)
-
ITAT - Gains arising on transfer of booking rights in 'office premises' is taxable as income from other sources and not long term capital gains.
S. Narendrakumar & Co vs DCIT
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 9432 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
ITAT - Income enhanced pursuant to expense disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) is “eligible profits” for computing deduction u/s 10B.
ACIT vs Precision Camshafts Limited
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 9431 (ITAT-PUNE) · Sections 10B, 40(a)(ia)
-
ITAT - No TDS u/s 194H on amount paid to a credit company towards “authority to guarantee” under a risk sharing agreement.
John Deere India Pvt. Ltd. vs CIT(A)
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 9430 (ITAT-PUNE) · Section 194H
-
ITAT - Sale of tea-estate as a “going concern” is not a slump-sale u/s 50B as not a case of sale by lock, stock and barrel.
DCIT vs. Tongani Tea Co. Ltd.
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 9429 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
-
ITAT - Relief u/s 90 for taxes paid by assessee in foreign country is available against MAT liability.
DCIT vs. Subex Technology Ltd
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 9428 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 90
-
HC - Although Sec 185 r.w.s. 184, is worded in emphatic terms, is not intended to be a mandatory provisions. Partners' remuneration allowed despite non-filing of reconstituted deed with return.
CIT vs. S.R. Batliboi & Associates
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 9422 (HC-CALCUTTA)
-
HC - TRO not authorized to attach a property belonging to the company under liquidation. Official Liquidator to take the possession of the same.
Official Liquidator of Jupiter Bioscience Limited vs. TRO
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 9421 (HC-KARNATAKA)
-
ITAT - Due to huge variation in profit margin of comparable company from that of assessee-company, said company should be excluded from comparable list.
NYK Line (India) Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of Income-tax, Range 1 (3), Mumbai
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 9420 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenINTL.aspx?ID=8757&Category=INTLDecisions&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - In case of a hotel, renovation of hotel rooms, conference hall, etc., was an allowable revenue expenditure.
Commissioner of Income-tax v. Cama Hotels Ltd.
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 9419 (HC-GUJARAT) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=58868&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - For application of provisions of section 194C, agreement with contractor/sub-contractor can be an oral agreement.
Commissioner of Income-tax, Belgaum v. Maruti Subray Patil
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 9418 (HC-KARNATAKA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=62064&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - On failure of AO to make enquiry whether land sold by assessee was used for agricultural purposes in last two years or not while allowing exemption u/s 54B, revision u/s 263 was justified.
Om Prakash Rajoria v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Ajmer
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 9417 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=43785&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - In international transactions LIBOR is best basis for benchmarking interest rate.
Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Range 8 (1), Mumbai v. Geodesic Ltd.
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 9414 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenINTL.aspx?ID=8450&Category=INTLDecisions&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Since refunds accrued to assessee for earlier assessment years were not processed, Assessing Officer has no powers under section 245 to adjust the same for any new subsisting due.
Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Large Taxpayer Unit-I, Chennai v. Sundaram Asset Management Co. Ltd.
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 9413 (HC-MADRAS) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=61377&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - On failure of assessee to prove that he had received Rs. 15 lakhs in cash towards advance for sale of property, penalty u/s 271D justified.
Parayil Balan Nair v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Kannur
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 9412 (HC-KERALA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=62292&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.