-
Undisclosed income found in search: Law on whether statement obtained u/s 132(4) admitting earning of undisclosed income, which is allegedly retracted, can be used for making assessment explained in the light of P.V. Kalyanasundaram 294 ITR 49 (SC), S. Kadar Khan 352 ITR 480 (SC) and CBDT’s Circular
DCIT. vs. Studio Aethletic Health & Hospitality Pvt. Ltd.
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13941 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
S. 14A/ Rule 8D: Imp principles law down reg (i) disallowance for single segment companies being investors and dealers in shares and having to incur all business expenses under normal circumstances, (ii) strategic investments, (iii) securities held as stock-in-trade, (iv) inclusion of securities which have not yielded any exempt income and (v) whether diminution in value of securities constitutes "expenditure" for disallowance
ACIT. vs. Af-taab Investment Company Limited
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13940 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section. 14A
-
S. 68 Bogus share capital: In the case of credit as share capital by corporate entity, whose existence is shown by its registration with Registrar of companies and its filing of tax returns, adverse conclusion is not justified merely because its directors are not produced personally before the AO by the assessee. The AO has to demonstrate with specific evidence that the assessee has in reality obtained accommodation entries by showing cash deposits linked to the investors
ITO. Vs. Shreedham Construction Pvt. Ltd.
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13931 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section. 68
-
S. 276C/277 Prosecution: Submission that claim of depreciation on land was a “mere clerical mistake” is not acceptable if the assessee did not file a revised return to correct the alleged mistake. A claim in a return which is scrutinized by the auditors and the directors cannot be considered as a mere accounting mistake
Ambience Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13930 (HC-DELHI) · Sections. 276C, 277
-
Low Tax Effect Circular: The view of the two-judge bench in Suman Dhamija & Gemini Distilleries that CBDT's low tax Circular dated 09.02.2011 cannot be given retrospective effect cannot be followed as it is contrary to the three-judge bench verdict in Surya Herbal. A beneficial circular has to be applied retrospectively while an oppressive circular has to be applied prospectively. Circular dated 9.2.2011 has retrospective operation except for two caveats: (i) The Circular should not be applied ipso facto when the matter has cascading effect and/or (ii) where common principles are involved in subsequent group of matters or a large number of matters
DIT. vs. S. R. M. B. Dairy Farming (P) Ltd.
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13912 (SC)
-
S. 68 Bogus share capital: Companies which invest share capital cannot be treated as bogus if they are registered and have been assessed. Once the assessee has produced documentary evidence to establish the existence of such companies, the burden shifts to the Revenue to establish their case. Reliance on statements of third parties who have not been subjected to cross examination is not permissible. Voluminous documents produced by the assessee cannot be discarded merely on the basis of statements of individuals contrary to such public documents
Pr. CIT. vs. Paradise Inland Shipping Pvt. Ltd.
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13911 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section. 68
-
S. 45/ 48: The scheme of the Act is to assess real income and not hypothetical income. The word "accrue" in "full value of consideration received or accruing" in s. 45 means that the assessee has a legally enforceable right to receive the sum. An amount which is payable only on fulfillment of conditions does not create an enforceable right and has to be excluded while computing capital gains
Late Shri Gordhandas S. Garodia vs. DCIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13904 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Sections. 45, 48
-
S. 43B: Advance deposit of central excise duty in the Personal Ledger Account (PLA) constitutes actual payment of duty within the meaning of s. 43B and the assessee is entitled to the benefit of deduction of the said amount
CIT vs. Modipon Limited
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13885 (SC) · Section 43B
-
S. 264 Revision: Powers and duties of the CIT while dealing with a revision application filed by an assessee explained
Paradigm Geophysical Pty. Ltd. vs. DCIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13884 (HC-DELHI) · Section. 264
-
Withdrawal of appeal: The Petitioner/ Plaintiff is the ‘dominus litis’ and it is open to him to pursue or abandon his case. Withdrawal cannot be denied except when the person making the prayer has obtained some advantage/ benefit which he seeks to retain
M/s Sainath Enterprises vs. ACIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13883 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Principles of mutuality: Entire law on whether a club whose membership is also open to the persons from the public and whose management is looked after by officials of HUDA is eligible to claim the benefits of "mutuality" explained in the light of Banglore Club 350 ITR 509 (SC) and other judgements
ITO. vs. Gymkhana Club
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13826 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
-
It is trite that when two views are possible, one which favours the assessees has to be adopted. Circulars are binding on the Department. The Government itself has taken the position that where whole of excise duty or service tax is exempted, even the Education Cess as well as Secondary and Higher Education Cess would not be payable. This is the rational view
SRD Nutrients Private Limited vs. CCE
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13825 (SC)
-
HC - Under Sec. 226, the money which belong to the assessee shall only be available for payment as income-tax dues however, money lying in assessee’s bank account to the extent of decree passed did not belong to it as assessee was holding such money in trust.
Sunil Kumar vs. Stock Guru India Ltd. & Anr.
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13821 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
ITAT - Nine month lease rental receipt by way of forfeiture of security deposit cannot be given any different treatment then the lease rental receipt which qualify for deduction u/s. 80IAB.
Quadron Business Part Ltd. Vs. Dy. CIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13820 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section. 80IAB
-
ITAT - In view of the benefit conferred by Article 6 of India-Kenya DTAA, rental income earned by a bank from house property at Kenya is not taxable in India. Any notification or circular cannot alter the nature of income that has been specifically included in DTAAs.
Bank of India Vs. CIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13817 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
ITAT - Amount received in respect of sublicensing of patented technical know-how was taxable as business income and not as capital gains in the absence of any ‘extinguishment’.
Bosch Ltd. Vs. Dy. CIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13816 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
-
ITAT - No addition u/s 68/69/69A can be made on the basis of print outs taken from the computer back–up impounded and seized and found from a third party.
Ms. Katrina (Kaif) Rosemary Turcotte Vs. Asstt. CIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13810 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
ITAT - Sales tax subsidy received by the assessee from from the Government of Haryana (post accomplishment of project) was revenue receipt chargeable to tax.
Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. Vs. Addl. CIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13809 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
ITAT - Working directors were well qualified and looked after general administration, finance apart from research activity, production and marketing. Deduction allowable for commission (paid within company law limit) to director-cum-shareholder.
S.H. Kelkar & Co. Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13808 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
ITAT - In addition to assessee’s claim u/s. 54EC, exemption u/s 54EC available on minor’s income.
Shri Bimal Desai Vs. Dy. CIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 13807 (ITAT-PUNE) · Section. 54EC
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.