-
ITAT - Brand building expenditure to create public awareness and consciousness of product so as to increase sales of assessee could not be said to bring any benefit of enduring nature; Allowable.
Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle- 2(2), Mumbai v. Polygel Industries (P.) Ltd.
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6257 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=40413&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Internal TNM Method was liable to be applied in order to compute ALP for international transaction from AE as well as third parties, if AE segment and third party segment being functionally comparable.
Eaton Fluid Power Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-8, Pune
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6256 (ITAT-PUNE) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=40412&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Reassessment initiated for examining tax implications of deferred revenue on warranty claims is justified. Writ of assessee dismissed.
Dell India Pvt Ltd. vs. JCIT
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6255 (HC-KARNATAKA)
-
HC - AO is not justified in disallowing direct expenses without rejecting books and also when profit rate as declared was better than rate accepted in last year.
Commissioner of Income-tax, Panchkula v. Smt. Kailash Grover
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6254 (HC-P&H) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=58856&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Additions (Investment in property) made on buyer on basis of statement of seller during survey and other evidences to be sustained when assessee could not controvert findings recorded by Assessing Officer.
Joginder Lal v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Ludhiana
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6253 (HC-P&H) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=60400&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Either interest need to be waived or if not waived then the waived principal amount will have to be reduced by the amount of interest, which is not permitted for deduction u/s 43B. Revenue cannot treat entire waived amount towards principal and also deny interest u/s 43B (a double jeopardy).
CIT and Anr. vs. KLN Agrotechs (P) Ltd.
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6252 (HC-KARNATAKA) · Section. 43B
-
HC - Merely because assessee challenged ITAT’s order does not mean that ITAT is prevented in law from dealing with application u/s 254(2). Section 254(2) confers power upon ITAT to rectify any mistake apparent from the record within 4 years from the date of order.
R W Promotions P ltd vs ITAT
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6251 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section. 254
-
HC - Section 80P(2)(a)(i) deduction available to assessee co-operative society engaged in providing credit facilities to its members as assessee not a co-operative bank as per Banking Regulation Act.
The Quepem Urban Co-operative Credit Society Ltd vs ACIT
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6249 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section. 80P
-
ITAT - Section 80IA tax holiday (For infrastructure development) is available for construction of Foot Over Bridges and Bus Shelters. Bus shelters and FOB be considered as part of ‘infrastructure facility’ for claiming deduction u/s 80IA.
DCIT. vs. Vantage Advertising (P)Ltd.
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6248 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · Section. 80IA
-
HC - Section 80I tax holiday is available to assessee availing services of workers through contractors. There is nothing in Section 80I(2)(iv) to say that the relationship in order to qualify for the term “employment” must be one of master and servant and cannot extend to contractual employment.
Trimatic Engineering Co P Ltd vs. ACIT
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6223 (HC-DELHI) · Section. 80I
-
ITAT - CIT(Administration) authorizing Revenue’s appeal against its own order in capacity as CIT(A), not ‘judicial- propriety’ violation
ITO. Vs. Paras Builders
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6222 (ITAT-PUNE)
-
ITAT - Wheeling, scheduling and transmission charges to State power utility for using its distribution network to sell energy generated by assessee to end consumers is not FTS as it does not involve human intervention. No TDS u/s 194J
Auro Mira Biopower India (P.) Ltd. v. Income-tax Officer, TDS Ward I(5), Chennai
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6208 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=40335&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Where assessee did not disclose this income in his returns but during survey, a director of assessee company made a statement about materials and undisclosed income, addition u/s 69A against company was justified.
Raj Hans Towers (P.) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax-V
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6207 (HC-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=59327&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC- Where assessee sold goods to stockiest below MRP by treating the differential amount as managerial fees, question of invoking section 194J against assessee did not arise
Commissioner of Income-tax (TDS) v. Piramal Healthcare Ltd.
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6206 (HC-BOMBAY) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=59201&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - No reassessment on the basis of mere change of opinion by AO
Godrej Agrovet Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, 10(2)
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6205 (HC-BOMBAY) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=59304&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Where assessing Officer proceeded on basis of doubts as to genuineness of claim rather than some concrete material, disallowance of deduction under section 80-IC to manufacturer of LCD monitors was not justified.
Commissioner of Income-tax –XI v. Tej Pal Singh Kohli
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6204 (HC-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=59220&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - MAT Companies are liable to pay interest under sections 234B and 234C
Binani Cement Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle-XXVIII, Kolkata
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6203 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=40337&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - No section 80IA benefit on import license sale as there was no nexus with assessee’s business
Deccan Industrial Products vs ACIT
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6192 (HC-AP) · Section. 80IA
-
HC - Amount remitted by Indian branch to overseas group entities is not taxable as income unless RBI approval as required under FERA is obtained.
DIT. vs. Booz Allen and Hamilton (India) Ltd & Co
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6191 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
HC - Since non-competition agreement with the assessee(co-founder) is only to ward off any competition, therefore non-compete fee paid to assessee (co-founder) is not salary but a capital receipt.
G. Raveendran vs. CIT
(2015) TaxCorp(LJ) 6189 (HC-MADRAS)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.