-
At the time of hearing before the Tribunal nothing has been brought on record by the ld. counsel for the assessee to establish that these expenses were wholly and exclusively incurred for the purpose of his business. Keeping in view the same as well as for the specific reasons given by the AO, it is of the view that the disallowance made by the AO on account of driver’s salary and fuel and lubricant expense was fully justified and the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly confirmed by the same.
AVINASH SHAW VERSUS ITO, WARD – 31 (1), KOLKATA
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22317 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82558&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Petitioners stated in the grounds of appeal he has not raised the grounds now urged before this Court before the Appellate Authority. Therefore, it would only be appropriate that a direction is given to the petitioner to file the additional grounds now raised regarding the violation of principles of natural justice and a further direction is given to the CIT (appeals) to consider the same in the first instance and, if he finds that there is a violation of principles of natural justice, pass appropriate orders.
VIJIKUMAR AND ALAMELU CHIDAMBARAM VERSUS ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2 (1) , TIRUCHIRAPALLI.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22316 (HC-MADRAS) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82737&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The appeals were preferred on 16th March, 2020. Though the period of limitation had not expired, but going through the circumstances resulting into preparation of the demand drafts as noticed above, the working of the Cooperative Society has come to a halt. Instead of directing the Tribunal to decide the application firstly, I deem it appropriate to issue directions to the Tribunal to decide the appeals within some time line and in order to enable the petitioner it seems appropriate to direct the income tax officer not to press for the encashment of the demand drafts, provided the petitioner deposits at least 30% of the demanded tax within a period of one week from today.
THE PUTHENCHIRA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD VERSUS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) , THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22315 (HC-KERALA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82738&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The issue in the present case is already covered against the assessee in assessment year 2010-11 we do not find any reason to deviate from the same. Therefore, respectfully following the decision of the coordinate bench in the assessee’s own case the disallowance under Section 14A of the Act in the normal computation of the total income is upheld. This issue is squarely covered by the order of the coordinate bench in assessee’s own case wherein following the decision of the Special Bench in the case of Vireet Investment the addition is deleted.
DCIT (LTU) CIRCLE-1 NEW DELHI VERSUS INDIAN RAILWAY FINANCE CORPORATION LTD. AND (VICE-VERSA)
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22314 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82535&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
It is incumbent on the Assessing Officer, when objections against the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for formation of belief of escapement of income, have been raised by the assessee, that the Assessing Officer needs must decided such objections by a specific separate order, disposing of the said objections. In case, the AO rejects the objections raised by the assessee, such a separate order would enable, following the principles of natural justice, an opportunity to the assessee, to challenge the said separate order before the competent Court.
HARAKH CHAND GLASS PVT. LTD. VERSUS DY. CIT CIRCLE 2 ALLAHABAD
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22313 (ITAT-ALLAHABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82537&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Outstanding amount of ₹ 1,25,39,228/- on account of service tax pertains to the period prior to 30-06-2011 rather a sum of ₹ 1,21,38,957/- relates to earlier financial year being 2010-11 and therefore, it was the opening balance of statutory liability as on 01-04-2011. The assessee has not routed the outstanding service tax through its profit and loss account but has taken this amount directly to the balance sheet.
M/S. DEN FUTURISTIC CABLE NETWORKS PVT. LTD. (EARLIER KNOWN AS DEN SKY MEDIA NET WORK PVT. LTD) VERSUS THE ITO WARD- 2 (1) JAIPUR
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22312 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82541&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
According to Section 153A of the Act assessment or re-assessment relating to any assessment year falling within the period of 6 assessment year pending on the date of initiation of the search under Section 132 would abate. Apparently in this case the date of search is 16.07.2009 and this year’s period would be assessment year 2004-05 to assessment year 2009-10. Therefore, it is apparent that the assessee for assessment year 2008-09 should have been made under Section 153C of the Act and not under Section 143(3) of the Act as has been done.
COUNTRYWIDE PROMOTERS PVT. LTD. VERSUS ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE – 23 NEW DELHI AND (VICE-VERSA)
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22311 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82542&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The assessee has taken housing loan of ₹ 2,25,00,000/- from Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd., on 28.01.2011 and said loan has been directly paid to Hiranandani constructions Pvt Ltd. Since the installment paid for purchase of flat is in excess of amount needs to be paid, in the schedule of payments the developer has paid interest of ₹ 13,62,658/- calculated @ 12% on excess money received before the due date of payment from the assessee.
BIPIN BHUPENDRA MODY VERSUS ACIT, CIRCLE – 18 (1), MUMBAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22310 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82543&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
AS-14, nowhere prescribed for different method of computation of net worth of undertaking acquired by way of slump sale for different purposes. In this case, the assessee although, followed AS-14 for accounting of acquisition of business, while arriving at goodwill, it has revalued its assets, which is different from value of assets, as per books of accounts of erstwhile proprietorship firm. When it comes to payment of capital gain on slump sale, the proprietor of erstwhile firm has taken net worth as per books of accounts of firm as on the date of acquisition.
ABHISHRI PACKAGING PVT. LTD. VERSUS DCIT-9 (1) (1) MUMBAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22309 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82547&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Disallowances/ additions made by the AO in respect of depreciation on non-existing assets and prior period expenses were deleted by this Tribunal vide order dated 28-08-2017. Thus the additions itself are not in existence then the penalty levied by the AO would not survive. The ld. DR has submitted that the Department has filed an appeal against the order of this Tribunal before the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court, however the findings of this Tribunal on these issues have not been disturbed by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court till date.
THE ACIT CIRCLE – 2 AJMER VERSUS M/S. AJMER VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD. AND (VICE-VERSA)
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22308 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82517&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Revenue authority are not to put on blinkers and ignore the overwhelming surrounding circumstances. CIT(A)’s reliance upon the case laws and the circular is totally not applicable on the facts of the present case. The facts of the case prima facie indicate that assessee has received sums abroad from foreign concern on account of services rendered in India. In these circumstances it was incumbent upon the assessee to cogently rebut that assessee has not received any sums abroad for services rendered in India which could have been transferred from abroad in his Indian account through these concerns.
DCIT (IT) -4 (1) (2) MUMBAI VERSUS SHRI ARUN MADHVACHARI RANGACHARI C/O. DAR MEDIA PVT. LTD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22307 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82523&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The product manufactured by the assessee as per the license of manufacturing issued by the authorities is a Fungicide namely, Trichoderma Viride. This product of Fungicides is also a prohibited item covered under Item no. 15 of Schedule XIII part B of the I.T. Act. Thus, the ld. CIT (A) after examination of the certificates issued by SIIDC, UEPPCB, TNAU, AC Customs & Central Excise, the product manufactured (Trichoderma Viride).
AJAY VERMA VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-59 (3) , NEW DELHI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22306 (ITAT-NEW DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82524&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
On a perusal of the lease and license agreement it is seen that burden of paying the property tax is on the licensor. As per the mutual agreement between the parties, the licensee agreed to reimburse the property tax to the licensor save and except any late fee / charge for any statutory dues. Thus, as could be seen from the aforesaid terms of the agreement, the reimbursement of property tax by the assessee to the licensor is purely contractual and not a statutory liability.
AREVA INDIA PVT. LTD. VERSUS ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE–14 (1) (1), MUMBAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22305 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82526&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
It is only after recording of such satisfaction that the A.O can take recourse to the provisions of Sec.14A(2) and (3) r.w Rule 8D of the Rules. Although, we are in agreement with the claim of the ld. A.R that in the absence of recording of the requisite satisfaction as regards the correctness of an assesse’s claim of disallowance under Sec.14A, the A.O is divested of his jurisdiction to dislodge the suo-moto disallowance made by the assessee under Sec. 14A of the Act, but then, we find that there is no such infraction of the said statutory requirement by the A.O in the case before us.
KJMC CORPORATE ADVISORS (INDIA) PVT. LTD VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER, CIRCLE-3 (2) (3), MUMBAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22304 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82512&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The assessee claims to be an agriculturist but the closure scrutiny of the case reveals that the assessee is co-owner of 300 bighas of land and further, he is into the business of money lending, contract business, therefore, in our view, the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) was a reasonable order as it merely restricted to ₹ 2,50,000 /-. Hence, we do not find any error in the order of the Ld.CIT(A). Hence, this Ground is dismissed.
SANTOSH KUMAR PANDEY, S/O. LATE SHRI BABU RAM PANDEY VERSUS ACIT-2, AGRA
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22303 (ITAT-AGRA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82509&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
In the present case, assessee has taken permanent membership of CCI Club and assessee is allowed to use the facility of the club and it can never create any capital assets. As the assessee can only utilize the facility and in case, he decides to surrender the membership, he will not get any refund. Therefore, assessee does not get any right by becoming a member.
SHAILENDER MAYANK HEMCHAND VERSUS ACIT-19 (3), MUMBAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22302 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82497&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Section 201 of the Act provides that where any person, including the principal officer of a company or an employer, who is required to deduct tax at source on any sum, in accordance with the provisions of the Act, does not deduct or does not pay such tax or fails to pay such tax, after making the deduction, then such person shall be deemed to be an assessee in default in respect of such tax. Therefore, section 201 of the Act is applicable in the case of the assessee.
SHAKUNTALA KUSHWAHA VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER 2 (3) ALLAHABAD
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22301 (ITAT-ALLAHABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82499&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
When assessee is engaged in real estate business and is constructing flats which are meant for the purpose of sale/renting purposes as a business, the interest expenses incurred on borrowings are towards revenue field and was correctly charged to Profit and Loss Account as time cost and claimed as deduction while computing income of the assessee.
SHRI A.K. NATARAJAN, VERSUS THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VILLUPURAM
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22300 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82504&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Income for the year under consideration of ₹ 447.30 crore and further ₹ 17.89 crore was accrued to the assessee. The assessee offered the same under the head Capital Gain and no other income which is not accrued to the assessee is not liable to tax in the year under consideration. The remaining income was accrued only in subsequent Assessment Year i.e. A.Y. 2013-14 to 2016-17 that is an amount of ₹ 17.89 Crore each in four subsequent years, and the same has been offered for taxation under the head Capital Gain. Even this fact is not disputed by the revenue.
UNIVERSAL MEDICARE PVT. LTD. VERSUS DCIT, CENTRAL CRICLE-3 (2) , MUMBAI AND (VICE-VERSA)
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22299 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82505&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
After careful reading of section 115BBD, we agree with the submission of Ld. AR that there is no provision in that section to eliminate the dividend income from specified foreign company before setting off of loss and similar to the provisions and specific direction present in section 115BBE.
TATA MOTORS LTD. VERSUS DCIT LTU-2, MUMBAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22298 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82506&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.