-
ITAT - Deduction u/s 80IB allowed as assessee was not manufacturing proto-type of jewellery but it has produced variety of items containing numerous designs, shape, size and specification and it is not feasible or possible to maintain any quantitative records on daily basis.
ITO, Vapi-Ward-4, Daman Versus M/s. Padmavati Arts
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12227 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54697&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - No tax is needed to be deducted at source u/s 195 as the amount paid does not amount to ‘royalty’. Therefore, the disallowance under section 40(a)(i) for non-deduction at source on the amount paid to FSC for the time charter hire is erroneous.
M/s. Sical Logisticts Ltd. Versus The Assistant Director of Income-tax, International Taxation, Chennai
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12226 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenINTL.aspx?ID=11287&Category=INTLDecisions&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Additional depreciation on diagnostic/service equipments allowed.
M/s Abbott Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Asst. Commissioner of Income-Tax – Range 2 (1), Mumbai
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12225 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54699&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Mere mistake in the language in the notice for non-striking off of ‘inaccurate particular’ or marking on ‘concealment of income’ portion cannot by itself invalidate the notice u/s 274. Mere not striking off specific limb cannot by itself invalidate notice issued u/s 274.
M/s Trishul Enterprises Versus ACIT, Circle- (1), Thane
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12224 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54670&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Consultancy charges incurred on designing and implementation of TDS and other systems is revenue expenditure.
Bayer CropScience Limited Versus Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax 15 (1) (2), Mumbai
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12222 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54675&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - AO has not followed the correct procedure as provided u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 92C(4) and 144C and has passed final assessment order without passing draft assessment order hence, the same is invalid in law.
Soktas India Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1, Kolhapur
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12221 (ITAT-PUNE) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=53926&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - As assessee was able to prove conclusively that the CCPS issued by it to Biometrix is directly financed by ICICI Bank, Singapore, therefore AO made addition of unexplained cash credit without any basis.
Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3 (3) (1), Mumbai Versus M/s Reliance Utilities P Ltd., and M/s Reliance Ports and Terminals Ltd.
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12220 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54669&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Transfer pricing adjustment - Some reasonable comparables should be selected after considering the FAR analysis of such comparable and only then exercise of determining ALP should be completed.
ASB International Pvt. Ltd. Versus ACIT-Circle-1, Mumbai and Vice-Versa
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12219 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenINTL.aspx?ID=11144&Category=INTLDecisions&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Receipt in the capacity of beneficiaries on dissolution of trusts cannot be taxed u/s 56(2)(vi) as the money received is not "without consideration".
Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Mrs. Sandhya A. Pratap
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12218 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54680&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - No TDS u/s 194I here the agreement was not of letting out but was for conduct of business.
Principal Commissioner of IT Jaipur Versus M/s Ajit And Company
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12217 (HC-RAJASTHAN) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=68500&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT (TM) - Process of generation of electricity through windmill amounts to ‘manufacture or production of article or thing’ u/s 32(1)(iia). ‘Additional depreciation ’ claim on windmills allowed.
Giriraj Enterprises Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12216 (ITAT-PUNE) · Section. 32(1)(iia)
-
ITAT - Provisions of Sec 14A applicable in respect of strategic investments made by assessee-company in subsidiary / associate companies for business purposes. Investment or as stock-in-trade becomes inconsequential or irrelevant for Sec 14A application as what is relevant is not the object for which the investment was made, but the nature of income.
Voltech Engineers P. Ltd. Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12215 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · Section. 14A
-
ITAT - Assignment of indigenously developed patent shall be taxable as ‘capital gains’ and shall be subject to applicability of Sec. 55(2).
Bharat Serums & Vaccines Ltd. vs. ACIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12214 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
ITAT - Area development authority isn't an extension of State under article 289 of Constitution of India and not immune from taxation.
Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle Parwanoo
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12213 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54579&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Dubbing Cost of foreign TV programs is a capital expenditure since without incurring dubbing costs, these programs (i.e. assets) could not be utilised for earning revenue.
Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, 8 (3) (1), Mumbai v. United Home Entertainment (P.) Ltd.
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12212 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=54662&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
S. 206AA does not have an overriding effect over the other provisions of the Act. By virtue of s. 90(2), the provisions of the Treaty override s. 206AA to the extent they are beneficial to the assessee. Consequently, the payer cannot be held liable to deduct tax at higher of the rates prescribed in s. 206AA in case of payments made to non-resident persons in spite of their failure to furnish the PAN
Nagarjuna Fertilizers and Chemicals Limited vs. ACIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12200 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · Section 206AA
-
The Commissioner and his officials are playing a blame game. To cover up their lapses and deficiencies, they turned around and blamed their Advocates .. We are sorry to say that this is not what was expected from the Commissioner of Service Tax. If the officers are unaware of legal procedures, then, they have to be in touch with their Advocates and periodically. They cannot expect that the Advocate himself comes to their office and apprise them as to what further has to be done after the filing of an Appeal
CCE vs. Vansum Industries
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12186 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
S. 164: The explanation to s. 164 cannot be read for determinability of the shares of the beneficiary with the quantum on the date when the Trust deed is executed. The real test is whether shares are determinable even when even or after the Trust is formed or may be in future when the Trust is in existence
CIT vs. India Advantage Fund-VII
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12185 (HC-KARNATAKA) · Section 164
-
Entire law on Permanent Establishment, Force of Attraction principle, taxability of software embedded in hardware as royalty, make available of technical services etc explained (all important judgements referred)
HITT Holland Institute of Traffic Technology B.V. vs. DDIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12184 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
-
S. 143(2)/ 292BB: The issue of a notice u/s 143(2) bearing the wrong (old) address of the assessee does not amount to a valid service of the notice u/s 282 r.w.s. 27 of the General Clauses Act. The non-service of a notice u/s 143(2) before the expiry of 12 months from the end of the month in which the return was filed renders the assessment void. As the assessee objected to the same before completion of proceedings, the assessment order is not saved by s. 292BB
CIT vs. Abacus Distribution Systems (India) Pvt. Ltd
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12154 (HC-BOMBAY) · Sections 143(2), 292BB
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.