-
Discount on issue of ESOP was allowable as deduction u/s.37(1) of the Act as primary object was not to vest capital but to earn profits by securing consistent services of employees.
Mahindra Lifespace Developers Ltd Vs Dy.CIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29503 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 37(1)
-
Mere generation of surplus cannot be a reason to deny exemption u/s 11.
Janodaya Trust Vs ACIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29502 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 11
-
A bank pass book or bank statement cannot be considered to be a 'book' maintained by the assessee for any previous year for the purpose of Section 68.
Vishan Swaroop Gupta Vs I.T.O.
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29501 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · Section 68
-
In the professional field there are innovative ways visualized by the professional to make themselves visible and to build their own professional profile for generating higher and value added business, and such scholarships created is visibility in international arena and his social standing.
Harish N. Salve Vs ACIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29500 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 37
-
Without any substantive material, assessee cannot be construed as owner of the WTGs. Payment made by it to Wescare can be treated only as a consumption charge for electricity supplied to them, for business purpose.
Tube Investments of India Ltd Vs Commissioner of Income Tax
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29499 (HC-MADRAS)
-
Provision of Article 289 is not applicable as the Trust did not fall under Article 12 of the Constitution since it has a separate legal entity distinct from the state.
Udupi Nirmithi Kendra Vs ACIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29498 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 11
-
License fee paid for purchases of software is not in the nature of royalty under India-Singapore DTAA and assessee is not liable to deduct TDS u/s 195.
Reliance Corporate IT Park Ltd Vs DCIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29484 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
If funds kept in fixed deposits is having inextricable link with project, then interest earned on short term deposits should be reduced from work in progress, but cannot be assessed under the head income from other sources.
Hitachi Automotive Systems (India) Pvt. Ltd Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29483 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
-
AO has merely acted on the basis of surmises and conjuncture in estimating 20% of the total receipt as unexplained cash credit. Therefore, the addition made upon the basis of guess work cannot be sustained.
Nitta Jatiya (Alias Nita Jatia) Vs DCIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29482 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Unless the assessee falls within Sec. 2(15), excluding first proviso, the assessee would not be entitled to the benefit of exemption from tax and if in case assessee falls within first proviso the benefit of registration which flow from Section 12A will not be available.
Gujarat Maritime Board Vs THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29481 (SC) · Section 2(15)
-
Even trial production machineries kept ready for use, were considered to be used for purpose of business to qualify for depreciation.
LAKSHMI GENERAL FINANCE LTD. Vs The Commissioner of Income Tax
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29480 (HC-MADRAS)
-
When the order of the Pr.CIT under Sec. 263 had been quashed by the Tribunal, therefore, the disallowance of depreciation on goodwill made by the A.O by relying on the order passed by his predecessor under Sec. 143(3) r.w.s 263 cannot survive on a standalone basis and was liable to be vacated.
FEDEX EXPRESS Vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29479 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
ITAT may, u/s 254(1), pass such orders as it thinks fit, nonetheless, the decision must be in respect of the subject matter of the dispute.
Divine Infracon Pvt Ltd Vs COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29478 (SC)
-
When Revenue did not made any additions u/s 69A, CIT(A) was justified in considering the same source of income at appellate stage and was justified in making enhancement.
Shri Praveen Garg Vs The Income Tax Officer
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29477 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
Sale of impugned property gave rise to LTCG and not STCG. Therefore revenue is directed to examine eligibility for deduction u/s 54.
Sri. Mahendrasingh Ramsingh Vs The Income Tax Officer
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29476 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
-
Commission was calculated as per provisions of Companies Act, 2013 , approved by AGM of the company, and paid to highly successful individuals.
Force Motors Ltd Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29475 (ITAT-PUNE)
-
There is a difference between conditions laid out for registration u/s 12AA and prerequisites for claiming exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiab).
IMC of ITI Dadri Vs ITO (Exemption)
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29474 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 10(23C)(iiiab)
-
Reimbursement cannot be treated as revenue receipts.
ASG Overseas Pvt. Ltd Vs DCIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29473 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 153A
-
There would be no question of inviting the penalty under section 271(1)(c). Mere making of a claim, which is not sustainable in law, by itself, will not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars regarding the income of the assessee.
IKEA Trading (India) Pvt. Ltd Vs ACIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29472 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 271(1)(c)
-
CENVAT credit written off due to merger of manufacturing unit with another company was allowable as a deduction, since the benefit of CENVAT credit not availed of against the excise duty payable cannot be utilised by the assessee.
Kaleesuwari Refinery Pvt. Ltd Vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29471 (HC-MADRAS)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.