-
Transfer pursuant to approval of scheme of arrangement, is not a contractual transfer but a statutorily approved transfer and cannot be brought within the definition of the word sale.
M/s.Areva T & D India Ltd. Vs The Commissioner of Income
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24215 (HC-MADRAS) · Section 50B
-
Advance received by assessee in subject AY 2007-08 pursuant to entering into development agreement and which was returned in 2015 upon cancellation of DA, not taxable as income from other sources.
The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs M/s.City Lubricants Pvt. Ltd.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24214 (HC-MADRAS)
-
In the context of the seller, Sec.50C allows exemption for a variance of 5% between stamp valuation & sales consideration, thus applying the same analogy AO is directed to ignore the difference being less than 10% for the purposes of Sec.56(2)(vii)(b).
Sri Sandeep Patil Vs The Income Tax Officer
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24213 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 56(2)(vii)(b)
-
In the facts of the present case, section 50D of the Act was applicable because the consideration to be received by the assessee was 50% of super built up area in the form of commercial complex etc. to be constructed by the builder.
Shri. Vivekanand Padegal Vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24212 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 50D
-
CIT(A) had rightfully allowed deduction on account of penal interest paid to RBI for non-maintenance of SLR and CRR including especially the provision made for the same to the extent of Rs.6,13,89,000/-.
The Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax Vs The Beed District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24211 (ITAT-PUNE)
-
The allowability or otherwise of interest payment u/s 36 (1) (iii) depends on the facts and circumstances of the case.
M/s.Hansa Estates P. Ltd. Vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24204 (HC-MADRAS) · Section 36(1)(iii)
-
A newspaper report was only a hearsay evidence and cannot be treated as proof of facts reported therein, holds that the amount has been reported in the news articles relied upon by the A.O. without carrying out adequate due diligence and without being ratified by the assessee or the investors, which does not in any case constitute adequate material on record.
ACIT Vs M/s. Reindeer Software Solutions Pvt. Ltd.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24203 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
-
A reading of the provision of section 40A (3) of the Act makes the intention of the legislature quite clear to disallow any expenditure incurred in cash whether in Indian currency or in foreign currency, if it exceeds the amount of Rs. 20,000 in rupee term.
Ramlord Apparels Vs ACIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24202 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 40A(3)
-
The investment in the new asset for the purpose of deduction under Section 54F need not be out of sale consideration received on sale of the original asset.
Ms.Moturi Lakshmi Vs The Income Tax Officer
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24199 (HC-MADRAS) · Section 54
-
For Sec.10B deduction purposes there is no need to establish the direct nexus between the income and the undertaking and where the assessee is engaged in the sole activity of export, entire business income of the 100% EOU will be the profits of the business of the undertaking.
The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs M/s.Oliver Valves India Pvt. Ltd.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24198 (HC-MADRAS) · Section 10B
-
Sec.21AA does not enlarge the field of taxpayers but only plugs evasion as the association of persons must be formed with members who have indeterminate shares in its income or assets, which is not the situation in the present case.
M/S BANGALORE CLUB Vs THE COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX & ANR.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24191 (SC)
-
While computing capital gains, the benefit of indexed cost of acquisition is to be considered for the purpose of computing tax liability u/s 115JB of the Act.
M/S. Best Trading And Agencies Ltd. Vs DCIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24190 (HC-KARNATKATA) · Section 115JB
-
The amount spent on renovation of such residential house by an assessee according to his requirements is allowable as exempt u/s.54F of the Act as it would amount to construction of a residential house.
Ms. Juveria Begum Vs Income Tax Officer
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 23178 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · Section 54F
-
Sec. 154 cannot be applied in case of a change of opinion by the AO or a debatable issue which requires to be established by arguments.
Shri Sandeep Bhargava (''HUF') Vs The DCIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 23171 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH) · Sections 54B, 154
-
The donation to Brahma Kumaris merits to be disallowed in the hands of the assessee, as it is case of charity. The same may be looked into as per the provision of section 80G of the Act.
Honda Motorcycle and Scooter India Pvt.Ltd. Vs The DCIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 23170 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 37
-
Merely having surplus in one year does not change the character of the trust to a business or profit-making entity which was otherwise a charitable trust advancing work of general public utility and certainly not hit by the first proviso to Section 2 (15) of the Act.
Credai- Pune Metro Vs The Income Tax Officer
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 23169 (ITAT-PUNE) · Section 11
-
Since the provisions of section 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii) were not available in the statute as on the date of entering into the agreement, the same (Sec. 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii)) cannot be made applicable to the assesse.
Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Sri Anala Anjibabu
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 23168 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM) · Section 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii)
-
One more opportunity required to be provided to the assessee for adjudicating both the cases on merit. However, the assessee has agreed to pay cost of Rs 5000/- . In the light of the above facts and circumstances, we restore this ex-parte order to the file of ld. CIT(E) for deciding afresh.
Yug Prabhavak Trust Vs CIT(Exemption)
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 23167 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · Section 12AA
-
Provisions of Section 234C does not apply to any shortfall in the payment of the tax due on the returned income if such shortfall is on account of underestimation of the amount of capital gain.
The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Vs IFCI LIMITED
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 23166 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 234C
-
When there is no satisfaction recorded by the ld. AO in the quantum assessment order and penalty initiated on one limb and ultimately levied on different limb of the assessee, then in such cases, the penalty levied deserved to be cancelled.
M/s. Emco Dyestuff Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Income Tax
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 23165 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 271(1)(c)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.