-
In the present case, the Non-resident Sports Associations had participated in the event, where cricket teams of these Associations had played various matches in the country. Though the payments were described as Guarantee Money, they were intricately connected with the event where various cricket teams were scheduled to play and did participate in the event. The source of income, as rightly contended by the Revenue, was in the playing of the matches in India.
PILCOM VERSUS C.I.T. WEST BENGAL-VII
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22437 (SC) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82882&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
CIT(A) has examined the nature and scope of the transactions and found that the impugned transactions are towards business and commercial purpose and there is no benefit accruing to the assessee from such transaction. Thus assessee has clearly established that the impugned transactions are not following within the scope of section 2(22)(e). Revenue is not able to dislodge such findings recorded by the Ld. CIT(A) by relevant material.
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 7 (1) , CHENNAI VERSUS SHRI. JETHANAND THAKUR BAKSHANI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22436 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83049&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
In the hands of one of the co-owners, the assessment was completed u/s. 143(3) by accepting the computation of long term capital gains made by the co-owner (Shri Thinkal Govind Kumar). In the case of Shri Thinkal Govind Kumar, the assessment was taken up for scrutiny based on AIR information that he had sold an immoveable property at Chennai on 05/10/2005.
SMT. SANTHI KRISHNAN VERSUS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 (3) , THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22435 (ITAT-COCHIN) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83050&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
There is merit in the submission of the Ld. counsel that the reliance placed by the Tribunal on the decision in the matter of Bovis Lend Lease (I) Pvt. Ltd. (supra), which was not cited or discussed by either the applicant or the respondent at any stage nor mentioned by the Hon’ble Members during the original hearing before the Tribunal or even when the appeal was re-fixed for clarifications by the Tribunal amounts to violation of principles of natural justice.
SODEXO SVC INDIA PVT. LTD. VERSUS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS) -2 (2) , MUMBAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22434 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83053&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
There was material before the AO to adjudge the admissibility of the said deduction in favour of the assessee particularly when the said step taken by the assessee was in accordance with Section 24 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 which was applicable to assessee. Section 24 of the said Act enabled the Electricity Board to subscribe to associations constituted for the purpose conducive to development of electricity and promotion of common interest of persons engaged in generation, distribution and supply of electricity.
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JABALPUR VERSUS M.P. ELECTRICITY BOARD, RAMPUR, JABALPUR
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22433 (HC-MP) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82873&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The AO had reopened the case without any evidence and that too after the block assessment was over and even the regular assessment u/s 143(3) was also completed. There was no evidence found during the course of search that there was undisclosed production. No information was available with the Revenue that there was unaccounted production.
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BHOPAL VERSUS M/S SOM DISTILLERIES AND BREWERIES LTD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22432 (HC-MP) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82874&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The Income Tax Act, 1961 does not make any distinction with regard to the objectives of the Charitable and Religious purposes and the Trusts having both these objectives can also be registered under Section 11 or 12AA of the Act. Tribunal was justified in allowing the appeal filed by the Assessee and upholding the registration of the Trust under Section 12AA read with Section 80G of the Act. The appeal filed by the Revenue is devoid of any merits.
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CHENNAI VERSUS M/S. BHAGAWAN MAHAVIR DIGAMBARA JAIN MANAGEMENT TRUST
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22431 (HC-MADRAS) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82876&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
If 8 per cent of gross receipts are deemed income of the assessee, the remaining 92 per cent are also deemed expenditure of the assessee. Meaning thereby that actual expenditure may not be 92 per cent of gross receipts, only for the purposes of taxation, it is considered to be so. Expenditure may be less than 92 per cent or it may also be more than 92 per cent of gross receipts.
SYED KHALID SAIFULLAH VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-28 (4) , NEW DELHI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22430 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83033&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Assessee has already filed original return of income accompanied by P & L A/c, balance-sheet. In the original return of income, the assessee has disclosed the receipt of ₹ 7 lakhs from Shri Praveen Kumar as per balance-sheet. Copy of the ledger account shows that it is already disclosed in the books of account of the assessee. Therefore, receipt of ₹ 7 lakhs from Shri Praveen Kumar as advance was already disclosed in the original return of income.
M/S. ALANKAR SAPHIRE DEVELOPERS VERSUS THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-15 (OLD), CENTRAL CIRCLE-14 (NEW) NEW DELHI., THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-14, NEW DELHI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22429 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83037&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
In a decision reported in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Punjab Financial Corporation) section 32AB(5) of the Act is not mandatory and the Assessing Officer has the discretion to entertain the audit report even though the same has not been filed with the return but presented during the course of assessment proceedings and give benefit of the deduction to the assessee in terms of Section 32AB(1).
THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I, BHOPAL VERSUS M/S KILPEST INDIA LIMITED
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22428 (HC-MP) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82866&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
In the case in hand, once it was found that there was double addition on same papers for two assessment years for a single project, it cannot be said that the assessee had failed to explain the loose papers despite the onus was placed upon him to prove the loose papers. No benefit can be derived by the Revenue from the judgment in Chuharmals case which is distinguishable on facts and is not applicable in the present case.
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 VERSUS M/S GEETANJALI BUILDERS PVT. LTD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22427 (HC-MP) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82867&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
In the present case, the expenditure on advertisement and sales promotion has been claimed for deduction as revenue expenditure. The advertisement and sales promotion is the necessity of the business and thus, an integral part of the business activity. Therefore, the expenses incurred on advertisement etc. are not for acquisition of an asset or right of a permanent character, therefore, cannot be said to be a capital expenditure. It is but a revenue expenditure.
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BHOPAL VERSUS M/S GODREJ FOODS LIMITED
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22426 (HC-MP) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82868&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
What is prohibited is the infusion of a participant in the transaction who does not become a ‘member’ of the common fund, at par with other members, and yet participates either in the contribution or surplus without subjecting itself to mutual rights and obligations. The principle of common identity prohibits any one dimensional alteration in the nature of participation in the mutual fund as the transaction fructifies.
YUM! RESTAURANTS (MARKETING) PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22425 (SC) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82869&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
As the assessee had been shown beyond doubt to be the owner of the residential house/Bungalow situated at Lonawala, therefore, irrespective of the fact that the said property was not occupied by him due to its poor quality of construction, the same continued to be a residential house which was owned by the assessee.
CHANDRAMOHAN MANOHAR POTDAR VERSUS ACIT-21 (3) MUMBAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22424 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83012&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The audit note/observation cannot constitute the opinion of the Assessing Officer when it comes to the applicability of the provisions of section 148 of the Act qua the reason to belief. The CIT(A), as per discussion given in para 5 onwards quashed the validity of the reassessment proceedings and allowed the appeal of the assessee.
ACIT, CIRCLE-3, NAGPUR. VERSUS UNITECH POWER TRANSMISSION LTD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22423 (ITAT-NAGPUR) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83013&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Without following the procedure as contemplated u/s. 144C of the Act the AO issued demand notice and penalty notice. Thereby, in our opinion, the final assessment order 28-04-2014 passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(3) of the Act lacked validity and it is liable to be quashed.
VANDERLANDE INDUSTRIES B.V., C/O VIPL VERSUS ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) – II, HYDERABAD
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22422 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83022&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
From 1983 onwards, Section 43B had taken within its fold diverse nature of deductions, ranging from tax, duty to bonus, commission, railway fee, interest on loans and general provisions for welfare of employees. An external examination of this journey of Section 43B reveals that the legislature never restricted it to a particular category of deduction and that intent cannot be read into the main Section by the Court, while sitting in judicial review.
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. VERSUS EXIDE INDUSTRIES LIMITED & ANR.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22421 (SC) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82860&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The appellate authority vide order dated 13.1.2011, had not only accepted the explanation offered by the appellant/assessee but also recorded a clear finding of fact that there was no concealment of income or furnishing of any inaccurate particulars of income by the appellant/assessee for the assessment year 1998-1999.
BASIR AHMED SISODIYA VERSUS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22420 (SC) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82861&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The expression business connection can be discerned from Section 9(1), as also, the meaning of expression business activity. We will advert to those provisions a little later and for the time being, assume that the stated activities of the respondent are business activities. However, since the stated activities of the liaison offices of the respondent in India are of preparatory or auxiliary character, the same would fall within the excepted category under Article 5(3)(e) of the DTAA.
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. VERSUS U.A.E. EXCHANGE CENTRE
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22419 (SC) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82862&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Bare reading of the assessment order dated 3-12-2010 does not reveal that any enquiry was conducted by the AO on the issue of nature of income arising from the arrangement of development of commercial complex after demolition of Cinema Hall Building on the land in question.
THE DCIT CIRCLE – 2 JAIPUR VERSUS M/S. MAN PRAKASH TALKIES PVT. LTD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22418 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83009&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.