-
HC - Advertisement and promotion expenses towards enhancement of brands owned by foreign parent-company is allowable as business expenditure.
Pr. CIT vs. Seagram Manufacturing Pvt. Ltd.
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 11817 (HC-DELHI)
-
HC - Transport subsidy received under Government scheme to boost industrial growth in north-eastern region constitutes a capital receipt and not a supplementary trade receipt.
Shiv Shakti Flour Mills (P) Ltd. vs. CIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 11816 (HC-GAUHATI)
-
S. 9(1)(vi)/ Article 12: Law on whether consideration received for licensing of software programmes can be assessed as "royalty" u/s 9(1)(vi) and Article 12 of the DTAA explained
Qad Europe B.V. vs. DDIT
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11815 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 9(1)(vi)
-
S. 5/ 9: Salary received by a non-resident for services rendered abroad accrues outside India and is not chargeable to tax in India. The source of the receipt is not relevant. The CIT has wide powers u/s 264 and has to exercise them in favour of the assessee in terms of CBDT Circular No. 14 (XL-35) dated 11.04.1955
Utanka Roy vs. DIT
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11814 (HC-CALCUTTA) · Sections 5, 9
-
S. 143(2)/ 143(3): Proper service of the notice u/s 143(2) is mandatory and its failure renders the assessment order void. The fact that an unauthorized person appeared on behalf of the assessee before the AO does not mean that the notice was properly served
DCIT vs. M. K. Enterprise
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11813 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · Sections 143(2), 143(3)
-
S. 10(23C)(vi)/ (via)/ 80G: The law laid down in Visvesvaraya Technological University vs. ACIT 384 ITR 37 (SC) is that the generation of surplus is not fatal to the grant of exemption u/s 10(23C)(vi)(via)/ 80G if such surplus is utilized for charitable purposes. The fact that the hospital charges of the assessee, as compared to other commercial establishments, are very nominal, throws further light on its charitable character
CIT vs. Gulab Devi Memorial Hospital Trust
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11812 (HC-P&H) · Sections 10(23C)(vi)/ (via), 80G
-
S. 50C: The stamp duty value on the date of the agreement to sell has to be adopted and not the value on the date of the deed of sale. The proviso to s. 50C, though inserted by the Finance Act 2016 w.e.f. 01.04.2017, has to be given retrospective effect from 01.04.2003 as it is intended to remove an undue hardship and is curative in nature
Chalasani Naga Ratna Kumari vs. ITO
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11811 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM) · Section 50C
-
ITAT - TDS u/s 194C applicable on availing of composite set of services such as stevedoring, loading and unloading, etc. and not u/s 194J.
DCIT (TDS) -1 (1), Mumbai Versus M/s. CMA CGM Global India Private Limited.
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 11810 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=53903&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Cost of the services provided by the AEs has been allocated on a formula which has been followed form year to year and there is no merit in disallowance of the cost incurred on receipt of support services from its AE.
Eaton Industries Manufacturing GmbH Versus The Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax (International Taxation) -I, Pune
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 11809 (ITAT-PUNE) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=53904&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Contract of supply of material is a separate distinct contract and on which no deduction is permissible u/s 194C.
The Income-tax Officer (TDS), Ward-2 (3) , Chandrapur Versus Maharashtra State Power Generation Co. Ltd.
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 11808 (ITAT-NAGPUR) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=53905&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - AO has failed to strike off either of the limbs of section 271(1)(c) of the Act, which are not satisfied by the assessee and consequently, notice issued under section 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) of the Act is bad in law.
Shri Raviraj Vikas Takawane Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle – 2 (3), Pune
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 11807 (ITAT-PUNE) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=53906&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Baggase/husk is not a waste but is a by-product of agriproduce processing industry which was purchased and not collected & processed or treated by the assessee, which is a pre-requisite for claiming deduction u/s.80JJA.
M/s. Pranav Agro Industries Ltd. Versus DCIT, Circle-4, Pune, ACIT, Circle-4, Pune
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 11806 (ITAT-PUNE) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=53907&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - No stay on recovery of demand since assessee has the capacity to pay, may be by out of his movable or immovable properties and inspite of that the ground is contended as of hardship, same cannot be termed as genuine hardship.
M/s. MOOKAMBIKA ASSOCIATES Versus SSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 2 (1), BENGALURU AND OTHERS
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11805 (HC-KARNATAKA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=68109&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - There is no statutory provision under the Income Tax Act, 1961, which provides that in case search was conducted/assessment proceeding under Section 153A has been initiated then the tax, which remains unpaid by the assessee for the same period cannot be recovered from the assessee.
Neo Corp International Ltd. through Sunil Trivedi Versus Principal, Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11804 (HC-MP) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=68161&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Assessee has utilized other funds (apart from sale consideration) for constructing residential house, for this reason only he cannot be denied deduction u/s 54.
Bhailalbhai N. Patel Versus DCIT, Circle-4, Baroda
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 11803 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=53910&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - No TDS u/s 194C even if payment is made to an Agent so long as the payment is meant for meeting the expenditure in the form of payment to the railways.
M/s. Ras Polybuild Products P. Ltd. Versus The DCIT, Circle-3 (1), Hyderabad
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 11802 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=53706&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - No transfer within the meaning of sec. 2(47) when a partner received his share in the partnership business. No revision u/s 263 as the order passed by the A.O. is not prejudicial to the interest of the revenue.
Desu Babu Rao Machilipatnam Versus CIT, Vijayawada
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 11801 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=53912&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Benefit u/s 10B available despite assessee's Forex receipt not direct, but exports made through its sister concern.
Pr. CIT. Vs. Earth Stone Group
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 11800 (HC-DELHI) · Section. 10B
-
ITAT - Disallowance u/s 40(a)(i) is a statutory disallowance, therefore enhanced profits due to disallowance shall be considered for deduction u/s 10B.
ITO – 2 (1) (4), Mumbai Versus M/s Anthelio Business Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (formerly known as Con Join Solutions Pvt. Ltd.) And Vice-Versa
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 11799 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=53896&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Since no show cause notice was given to the assessee before making the order proposing conduct of special audit u/s 142(2A), the assessment order passed is beyond the period of limitation and hence, the same is invalid and bad in law.
The Income Tax Officer (Central), Kolhapur Versus Vilsons Particle Board Industries Ltd. and Vica-Versa
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 11798 (ITAT-PUNE) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=53902&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.