-
Question of existence or not of a PE arises only if any part of its income is liable to be taxed as business income and since assessee's income is eligible for relief u/s 9(1) of the India-France DTAA, no income of the assessee is liable to be taxed as business profits in India and hence, the question of existence of PE becomes academic.
CMA CGM SA Vs Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax International Taxation
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20741 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
If any loss is not be allowed to be carried forward as discussed above, then the revenue has the power to deny the claim of the assessee in that very year only. If the revenue has omitted to do so, the remedy provided under the Act for the revenue to invoke the provisions of section 154 of the Act or 263 of the Act or 147 of the Act for that very assessment year as the case may be and depending upon the facts and circumstances. However, the Revenue has no remedy/power to disturb such claim of the assessee in any other assessment year.
The Dharangadhra People’s Co-op. Bank Ltd Vs DCIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20740 (ITAT-RAJKOT) · Sections 139(3), 139(5)
-
It is very clear that sec. 40(b)(iv) does not restrict disallowances of interest over and above 12% only on partners capital account.
Milind & Associates Vs ITO
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20739 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 40(b)(iv)
-
The prime objects of the trust are to implement the NEIA scheme through ECGC for the benefit of medium and long-term exports. The assessee endeavor to promote exports from India and to protect the payment risks for transactions for which ECGC is unable to provide cover owing to lack of capacity or commercial consideration. In other words, the assessee is to provide insurance cover to promote exports from India and to protect payments risks.
NEIA TRUST VERSUS ADIT (E) -II (2) , MUMBAI
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20738 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81110&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
In the present case, it is not a fact that the assessee has not maintained any information as required under section 92D(1) r/w rule 10D(1). The facts on record clearly indicate that the assessee, indeed, has maintained a number of information/documents as required under the statutory provisions. In fact, the assessee has furnished segmental profitability at gross level.
DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE–5 (1) (1) , MUMBAI VERSUS ARJAV DIAMOND INDIA PVT. LTD.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20737 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81115&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Acknowledgment reflects payment of taxes at ₹ 550/- only. Further, the assessee sought certain information under RTI, copy of the application is placed at page 12 with regard to the proceedings u/s 148, service of notice u/s 148 and also under section 142(1) of the Act. The assessee received certain information vide reply dated 26/02/2018, placed at paper book page 13, against which appeal was filed before the Addl. CIT and then appeal was also filed before the Chief Information Officer.
SMT. NEETU TAYAL VERSUS ITO, WARD-2 (3), NOIDA
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20736 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81119&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Assessing Officer has recorded that he is not satisfied with the explanation given by the assessee on the suo moto disallowance. The assessee has also not given any working to justify the suo moto disallowance. He made certain claims without supporting the same with figures. Under these circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the Assessing Officer has recorded satisfaction, that he is unable to accept the suo moto disallowance made by the assessee u/s 14A of the Act, prior to invoking Rule 8D of the Rules.
ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6 (2) , KOLKATA VERSUS M/S. WILLIAMSON MAGOR AND COMPANY LIMITED
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20735 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81123&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The undisputed facts are that during the course of search proceedings itself, the assessee has explained the break-up of cash in the name of his family members. Such break-up is exhibited elsewhere. The undisputed fact is that cash was found from the bedroom of the appellant and, therefore, it can be safely presumed that it was in joint possession of the assessee and his wife Smt. Gomati Devi.
SHRI GIRIRAJ SINGH JINDAL VERSUS THE DY. C.I.T CENTRAL CIRCLE – II FARIDABAD
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20734 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81124&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Subsequent to conclusion of assessment, when it comes to light that the assessee has had financial/ monetary dealings with dubious entities/ persons, giving rise to a serious and well-founded doubt about the creditworthiness of the investor and genuineness of the transaction, then the endeavour of the Assessing Officer to re-open the assessment in terms of section 147/148 of the Act should normally not be thwarted by the Court, if the same is done within the limitation period, and the same is not merely a case of change of opinion on the same set of facts.
RDS Project Limited Vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20733 (HC-DELHI)
-
The show cause notice issued was legally untenable since it was compositely issued to 9 companies while the prosecution was launched only on the petitioners. The said notice was not issued as a show cause notice preceding adjudication or the prosecution. Captioned subject of the said notice was to keep the Managing Director informed and to treat him as the Principal Officer of the Company as also clarifies that the order u/s 201(1)/(1A) was passed only in the name of the petitioner-company and not against all the companies.
Dr. Viloo Patell Vs DCIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20732 (HC-KARNATKATA)
-
As the payments received by the assessee from rendering of the maintenance and support services does not fall within the scope and gamut of the definition of 'royalty' in Article 12 of the India-Finland tax treaty, therefore, the payments received by the assessee for providing such support services cannot be held as 'royalty' in the hands of the assesse.
Trimble Solutions Corporation Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20731 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
The assessee has filed revised return of income, the assessee has not filed any revised tax audit report wherein the depreciation at enhanced rate was stated to be eligible. Thus, apparently in our considered opinion, it is a case of clear non-application of mind by the AO. We also do not agree with the contention of the Ld. Authorised Representative that the AO took one out of the two plausible views because if the GPU and PCA equipment do not fall under the category of air pollution control equipment at all, the only view possible is that depreciation is to be allowed @ 15% only.
M/S. DELHI AVIATION SERVICES PVT. LTD. VERSUS PR. CIT DELHI-3, NEW DELHI
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20730 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81086&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Facts on record do establish that the assessee had purchased the machinery and it was installed in its factory. When such evidences were filed before the Assessing Officer, the minimum which is expected from him was to verify the authenticity of these documents before treating the purchases as non–genuine. However, as it appears from record, the Assessing Officer has not conducted any effective enquiry qua the documentary evidences filed by the assessee.
PRIVI ORGANICS LTD. VERSUS DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE–4 (3) (1), MUMBAI AND (VICE-VERSA)
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20729 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81088&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Foreign currency forward contracts held by the assessee are far lesser than the underlying exposure on account of imports and exports. Hedging transaction entered in regular course of business activity cannot be treated as speculative transaction. It is not required by the assessee to establish a one–to–one linkage between the forward contracts and the export/import transaction.
UNI DESIGN JEWELLERY PVT. LTD. VERSUS DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE–9, MUMBAI
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20728 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81089&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Merely because the assessee is charging for certain goods and services, it does not render such activities as commercial activities and the fact that the AO has accepted that the assessee is promoting public interest as provided in the proviso to Section 2(15), there cannot be any doubt that the assessee should be regarded as charitable organisation and given the full benefit of exemption provided to such organisations under the Act.
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) VERSUS INDIA HABITAT CENTRE
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20727 (HC-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81737&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The claim of depreciation must result in reduction of the taxable income of the assessee. This interpretation is in consonance with the spirit and purpose of the provisions of section 50 r.w.s. 50A, which were introduced to avoid double benefit to the assessee in the form of depreciation as well as benefit of cost on sale of depreciable asset. However, where no benefit of depreciation has been allowed to the assessee, there remains no basis for pressing into service, the provisions of sections 50 and 50A of the Act and the assessee would be entitled to claim benefit of indexation.
RRJ Infra Industries Pvt. Ltd Vs Dy. CIT-6
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20726 (ITAT-LUCKNOW) · Section 49(1)
-
Only land which is appurtenant to residential house can be considered for claiming deduction u/s 54 which is a question of fact which requires investigation into facts and the facts may differ from case to case. The land may be integral part but the same may not necessarily be appurtenant to the building thereon as the same may not be required for enjoyment of the Building situated on the land.
Shri Maduranthagam Selvaraj Ravi Vs The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20725 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Section 54
-
The main object of the assessee is contribution towards planned and controlled development for the entire urban development area and such activity falls under the category of 'advancement of general public utility. When the activities of the assessee can be said to be in the nature of trade, commerce and business, considering the proviso to Section 2(15), the activities of the assessee cannot be said to be for charitable purpose.
DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTIONS) , AHMEDABAD VERSUS RAJKOT URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20724 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81081&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
It is not the case of the AO that cash deposits in saving bank account with Axis Bank has been not made out of cash in hand balance available with M/s. Orthonovo Joint & Trauma Hospital Pvt. Ltd. in which the assessee was director. The cash book of the company is reflecting day to day cash receipts, out of said cash balance, the cash deposits were made in the impugned bank account.
DR. HARPRIT SINGH, C/O M/S. ORTHONOVA HOSPITAL VERSUS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE –II, JALANDHAR (PB)
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20723 (ITAT-AMRITSAR) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81082&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Provision for meeting the liability for encashment of earned leave by the employees is not a contingent liability and is admissible as a deduction. On the basis of our aforesaid observations, we are of the considered view, that as the provision for leave encashment had been made by the assessee on actuarial basis, therefore, the same being in the nature of an ascertained liability could not have been added by the A.O for the purpose of determining the ‘book profit’ under Sec. 115JB of the Act.
M/S CAPRIHANS INDIA LTD. VERSUS DY. CIT CENTRAL CIRCL-36 MUMBAI. AND THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20722 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81085&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.