-
S. 220(6) Stay of demand: The AO cannot impose the per se condition that pending consideration of the application for stay of demand, certain minimum amount (15%/ 20%) has to be deposited by the assessee as prescribed by the CBDT. He has apply his mind and decide the application for stay of demand
Turner General Entertainment Networks India Pvt. Ltd vs. ITO
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16669 (HC-DELHI) · Section 220(6)
-
S. 80-IC: An assessee availing exemption of 100% tax on setting up of a new industry, which is admissible for 5 years, and either on the expiry of 5 years or thereafter (but within 10 years) from the date when these assessees started availing exemption, they carried out substantial expansion of its industry, from that year the assessees become entitled to claim exemption @ 100% again (Classic Binding Industries 407 ITR 429 held not good law and reversed)
PCIT vs. Aarham Softronics
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16668 (SC) · Section 80-IC
-
ITAT - No penalty u/s 271(1)(c) in case where in response to a notice u/s 153A assessee furnishes a return disclosing higher income.
SHRI NITINBHAI TULSIDAS CHOTTANI D-21 VERSUS DCIT, CENT. CIR. 1 (3) AHMEDABAD.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16658 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=70513&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Deduction u/s 35DDA cannot be denied when one unit out of three closed down.
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, COCHIN VERSUS M/S. TCM LTD, KALAMASSERY
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16657 (HC-KERALA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=75694&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Notice issued in the name of the dead person is not a procedural and / or clerical error and cannot be saved by Section 292B.
SUMIT BALKRISHNA GUPTA VERSUS ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 16 (2), MUMBAI & ORS.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16656 (HC-BOMBAY) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=75703&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Lump-sum lease rental received in advance would be taxable proportionately over lease period.
Sahakari Sakkare Karkhane Niyamith Vs ACIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16655 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
-
SC - Outstation visit of counsel is not a ground to seek adjournment.
Ram Siromani Tripathi & Ors Vs STATE OF U.P. & ORS
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16654 (SC)
-
ITAT - The fact that bills were not raised does not stop accrual of income under the mercantile system of accounting once contract was entered with clients.
Optum Health & Technology Vs The Income Tax Officer
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16653 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
-
S. 10(38) Bogus long-term capital gains from penny stocks: If the assessee has filed evidences for (a) purchase of shares, (b) payment by account payee cheque, (c) balance sheet disclosing investments, (d) demat statement (e) evidence of sale of shares through stock exchange, (e) bank statement reflecting sale receipts, (f) brokers ledger, (g) Contract Notes etc, the gains cannot be treated as bogus on human probabilities, suspicion, conjectures and surmises (All contra judgements distinguished)
Mahavir Jhanwar vs. ITO
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16652 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · Section 10(38)
-
S. 147 Reopening: If the assessee delays filing objections to the reasons and leaves the AO with little time to dispose of the objections and pass the assessment order before it gets time barred, it destroys the formula provided in Asian Paints 296 ITR 90 (Bom) that the AO should not pass the assessment order for 4 weeks. A writ petition to challenge the reopening will not be entertained
Cenveo Publisher Services India Ltd vs. UOI
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16651 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 147
-
HC - The ingredients of Sec. 153-C should be explicitly expressed in recording the satisfaction report by the AO of the searched person. In absence quashes assessment u/s 153C.
SHYAMRAJ SINGH Vs THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16648 (HC-KARNATAKA) · Section 153C
-
ITAT - Assessee was under a 'bonafide belief ' for TDS non-deduction on leave encashment payments made to employees on retirement. Sec. 201(1)/(1A) proceedings quashed.
Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Ltd Vs ITO
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16647 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
-
ITAT - Since there was non-application of mind by AO while initiating special audit, period taken for special audit u/s 142(2A) cannot be excluded to quash reassessment on the ground of limitation.
Consulting Engineering Services Pvt. Ltd Vs ACIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16646 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
ITAT - After disposal of the appeal by the Tribunal if the department comes with fresh evidence, certainly it cannot be entertained, much less by taking recourse of Section 254(2).
Acme Dwellers Pvt. Ltd Vs Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16645 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
ITAT - Reassessment beyond 4 years not jusified, based on information received from Mauritius Revenue Authorities as the same was not enough to hold that investment by Mauritius company.represented unaccounted income .
Mahakali Developers & Resorts Pvt Ltd Vs ITO
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16644 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
-
S. 68 Bogus share capital: In the case of a private company, Onus is on assessee to prove identity, creditworthiness of subscribers and most importantly genuineness of transactions. Even if AO does not make inquiry, CIT(A) should do so. Relief cannot be given merely on basis of Ration Card, Share Application forms, Voter ID etc of the subscribers
ITO vs. Yadu Steels & Power Pvt. Ltd
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16643 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 68
-
An adjournment cannot be sought on the ground that Counsel is out of station. The appeal has to be dismissed for non-prosecution. Under no circumstances, application for restoration shall be entertained
Ram Siromani Tripathi vs. State of U.P.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16642 (SC)
-
ITAT - PE in India - The establishment of PE in India is in respect of each assessment year only. There is no bar in carrying on the activities year after year. The determination of existence of PE in India is to be made by reference to provision in DTAA.
M/S ULO SYSTEMS LLC. C/O S.R. BATLIBOI AND CO. VERSUS ASSISTANT D.I.T, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, DEHRADUN
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16641 (ITAT-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=70349&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - There are no clear findings which have been recorded by the Assessing officer to depart from the settled position to hold that the assessee firm is not a ‘Kachha Arahtia’ but a ‘Pacca Arahtia’ - Privity of contract and underlying transaction documentation are critical for the purposes of present analysis.
M/S ROOPCHAND KODANDAS (ALUWALA) VERSUS INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-7 (2) , JAIPUR
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16640 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=70350&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Transfer pricing adjustment - Where the assessee was acting as contract manufacturer in respect of export of components to associated enterprises then, CUP method was not correct method to be applied to benchmark international transactions of the assessee - AO directed to apply TNMM method to benchmark.
A. RAYMOND FASTENERS PVT. LTD., VERSUS THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 9, PUNE
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16639 (ITAT-PUNE) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=70361&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.