-
The minimum guarantee amount paid by the distributor for acquiring the exhibition rights of a movie is a fixed expenditure for the distributor that is paid to producers irrespective of the fact whether the film generates a profit or incurs losses.
Sh. Yashovardhan Tyagi Vs ITO
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22584 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 9(1)(vi)
-
The belief of income escapement based purely on audit objection is nothing but a shame believe in the garb of audit objection raised by the Revenue which cannot be the basis for reopening of the assessment in the absence of any changed circumstances on the part of the assesse.
Lionbridge Technologies P. Ltd. Vs Asst. CIT.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22583 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Even an indirect connection between the expenditure incurred and the income could prove the nexus between the two. The bank charges being related to the interest income are duly allowable as expenditure in the hands of the assesse.
Chander Mohan Merwah Vs The ACIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22582 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 57(1)
-
Intimation in Form-10 for the purposes of claiming the benefit of the Section 11 could be furnished by the assessee even during the assessment proceedings.
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) Vs SOFTWARE TECHNOLOGIES PARKS OF INDIA
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22581 (SC) · Section 11
-
Treating the actual forex loss as transaction carried out in forex derivatives, which was actually incurred by the assessee when the said loans were received back, is against the facts.
Ninestars Information Technologies Pvt. Ltd Vs The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22580 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
-
First proviso to Section 50C of the Act, is applicable retrospectively. It does not create any new right between the parties. It simply clarifies the existing position of law.
The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Shri Vummidi Amarendran
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22579 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Section 50C
-
There can be various reasons for executing the two sale deeds, one such reason being to avoid deduction of tax. The vacant site purchased by the assessee which is adjacent to the residential house is necessary for convenient enjoyment of the building.
Shri M D Sundar Rao Vs The Income Tax Officer
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22578 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Section 54
-
Dividend has to be paid to all the shareholders equally and dividend is basically a return of investment and not salary or part thereof.
Abro Technologies Pvt. Ltd Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22577 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 36(1)(ii)
-
The outside lorry/truck owners do not have any responsibility or liability towards the principal, then it cannot be held that these outside parties were privity to the contract between the assessee and its principal. Therefore, the payment made to the outside lorry/truck owners do not come or fall within the purview of section 194C of the Act.
Bimal Kumar Sikaria Vs ACIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22576 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
-
Finding recorded by the Ld. CIT(Exemption) that the registration cannot be granted for the assessee as it is involved in imparting the training to the employees of the state govt, is incorrect and contrary to the law. For this purposes, we may rely upon the decision of CIT Vs. Andhra Pradesh Police Welfare Society and Water and land Management Training Research Institute and DIT Vs. National Safely Counsel.
VIBHAGIYA PRASHASKIYA PRASHIKSHAN SANSTHA, C/O. DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER OFFICE CAMPUS VERSUS THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) PUNE.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22575 (ITAT-PUNE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83408&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Department has no material to show that the earlier withdrawals made by the assessee has been spent for any specific purposes and not the said amount available with the assessee to redeposit into the bank account. There is also no evidence that the assessee has made withdrawals on various dates for any other purposes than the admission of assessee’s son in a medical college.
SRI. DHRUVA MUNGAMURI C/O. S. PARTHASARATHI VERSUS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5 (3) (5) BENGALURU
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22574 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83409&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Assessee has two main stream of revenues, one from NOP Project and from other project. Assessee is basically construction contractor and also indulged in developing and sale of project named NOP. On overall basis, assessee is following percentage completion method. Whether the method of percentage of completion method can be applied for construction contract as well as real estate development project with reference Guidance Note GN(A) 23 (R2012).
SHAKTI PROPERTY DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. VERSUS DCIT CEN CIR-8 (1) , MUMBAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22573 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83410&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
It is an undisputed fact that the assessee carried out repair and renovation expenses on a lease property which was taken on lease and any such repair and maintenance of lease property cannot be held to be giving any enduring benefit to the assessee, firstly for the reason that leased premises is for temporary period and nature of expenses are purely in nature of repairs.
ASPECT RESEARCH AND MANAGEMENT P. LTD. VERSUS ITO, WARD-2 (2) , NEW DELHI.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22572 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83412&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Though the assessee made an oral plea that the money had been advanced to the sister concerns on account of commercial expediency, the assessee failed to place any evidence to suggest whether funds advanced by the assessee to the sister concerns was in the nature of interest free own funds or the funds were advanced on account of commercial expediency.
MANGALAM PUBLICATIONS (INDIA) (P.) LTD. VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22571 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83413&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
AO had nowhere abandoned reasons which were the foundation for issuance of the notice for re-opening. He had considered the objections of the petitioner and disposed them of on the basis of material on record. The sole ground of the petitioner therefore, must fail. In the present case, notice for re-opening having been issued in the case of assessment which was not framed after scrutiny.
SURANA ENTERPRISES, SURANA JEWELERS VERSUS ITO, WARD-47 (3) NEW DELHI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22570 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83415&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
There subsists an order dated March 20, 2020 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court directing the revenue authorities not to initiate any recovery proceedings during the subsistence of the COVID-19 pandemic. Interest of justice would be subserved by directing the banks of the petitioners to allow the petitioners to operate the bank accounts, subject to setting aside Rs.5 lakhs in a separate FD account against the demand of the first petitioner.
Narayan Chandra Sarkar. Vs Union of India & Ors.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22569 (HC-CALCUTTA)
-
The activities of LO are in the nature of preparatory or auxiliary character in terms of Article 5(3)(e).
Union of India & Anr. Vs U.A.E. Exchange Centre
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22568 (SC)
-
The factual basis on which the Officer formed his opinion in the assessment order in regard to addition of Rs.2,26,000/ stands dispelled by the affidavits and statements of the concerned unregistered dealers in penalty proceedings. In such situation, the addition of amount of Rs.2,26,000/- cannot be justified, much less, maintained.
Basir Ahmed Sisodiya Vs The Income Tax Officer
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22567 (SC) · Section 68
-
Section 43B is a mix bag and new and dissimilar entries have been inserted therein from time to time to cater to different fiscal scenarios. The broad objective of enacting Section 43B concerning specified deductions referred to therein was to protect larger public interest primarily of revenue including welfare of the employees and Clause (f) fit into that scheme and shared sufficient nexus with the broad objective.
Union of India & Ors. Vs Exide Industries Limited & Anr.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22566 (SC) · Section 43B
-
The assessee company was formed to manage business on behalf of the holding company the purported mutual concern in the present case undertakes a commercial venture.
Yum! Restaurants (Marketing) Private Limited Vs Commissioner of Income Tax
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22565 (SC)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.