-
ITAT - Assessee has failed to discharge its obligation to verify the correct PAN. Demand of the differential TDS @20% valid.
Office of XEN, PHED, Jaipur Versus ITO, TDS-1, Jaipur
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11380 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=51820&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Mere non compliance of summon cannot be the basis to make addition u/s 68.
INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 32 (5), Versus SH. ABHISHEK KUMAR
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11379 (ITAT-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=51821&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Mere addition of part of the amount does not attract penalty for concealment.
K. Hemalatha Versus Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Hyderabad
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11378 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=51822&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Writ Allowed - AO was unable to process the return not because of his “volition” but due to the failure of technology employed by the IT Department. CCIT to ensure that the computer system runs in accordance with the Act or come up with an alternative so that the return can be processed by the AO u/s 143(1).
Shapoorji Pallonji and Co. Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11377 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section. 143(1)
-
ITAT - Management fees received by a company of Finland rendered to its Indian group company not taxable FTS under the provisions of Article 13 of India-Finland DTAA.
Outotec Oyj vs. DDIT(International Taxation)
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11376 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
-
HC - Writ allowed - Revenue to examine refund claims and pass appropriate orders despite scrutiny notices issued u/s 143(2).
Indus Towers Limited and Others vs. UOI and Ors
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11375 (HC-DELHI) · Section. 143(2)
-
HC - Mere description as a “supplier” in a suit by the assessee against the insurance company claiming an insurance claim for loss of equipment, when the assessee insured the equipment jointly with the purchaser, can possibly have no connection with the escapement of any income arising out of sale of the equipment.
DIT (IT) vs. Doosan Heavy Industries & Construction Co.
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11374 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
ITAT - The entire tax liability of the companies cannot be fastened on a single shareholder. If at all the tax liability of private limited company is to be borne by shareholders, it has to be borne equally in the ratio of shares held. - No deduction of expenditure incurred in connection with transfer being contingent in nature.
Smt. Durga Kumari Bobba Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 11 (2), Bangalore
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11373 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=51788&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - No TDS u/s 194H on charges deducted by the bank for use of swiping machines for sales through credit card as the same is not commission.
The Income Tax Officer (TDS) -3 (4) , Mumbai Versus The Mobile Store Ltd.
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11372 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=51790&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Disallowance of amount paid as commission to one whole time working Direcotr who had rendered extra service to the company was not avoidance of payment of tax. Expenditure allowed.
M/s. Marks Shipping Pvt. Ltd. Versus ACIT - 4 (2), Mumbai
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11371 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=51791&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - If the money was borrowed for purchase of shares of subsidiary company for the purpose of acquiring controlling interest and acquisition of such controlling interest was of the business of the assessee and it resulted in promote the business of the assessee as well as helpful to the assessee for having management control over said such subsidiary company, then the interest expenditure should be allowed u/s.36(1)(iii).
M/s. Aban Offshore Ltd. Versus The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Corporate Circle – 1 (1), Chennai and Vica-Versa
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11370 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=51793&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - If an assessee has deposited higher amount of tax than returned tax accepted by Revenue, the question of levy of interest u/s 234-A would not arise.
Narendra Prakash Mittal Versus Commissioner of Income Tax And Others
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11369 (HC-ALLAHABAD) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=66600&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Since assessment came to be reopened by the very same officer, who executed the scrutiny assessment and granted exemption, the same amounts to a case of change of opinion. Notice of reassessment quashed.
Gujarat State Board of School Textbooks Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11367 (HC-GUJARAT) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=66593&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Where initially assessee participated in the assessment proceedings and subsequently challenged the transfer orders u/s 127, the same cannot be accepted.
Akshata Mercantile Pvt. Ltd. Versus Dy. Commissioner of Income tax & Others
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11366 (HC-BOMBAY) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=66594&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - For the purpose of application under section 245C(1) of the Act, a case would be pending only as long as the order of assessment is not passed. Once the assessment is made by the Assessing Officer by passing the order of assessment, the case can no longer be stated to be pending. Accepting the contention that even if the order of assessment has been passed by the AO, the case may still be deemed to be pending since such order was not dispatched or served, would lead to a conflicting situation.
M/s SHALIBHADRA DEVELOPERS Versus SECRETARY AND 2
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11365 (HC-GUJARAT) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=66596&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Explanation 4 to section 271(1)(c) is clarificatory and not substantive and would apply even to assessment year prior to April 1, 2003.
Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Kanpur Versus M/s. Mohan Steels Ltd.
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11364 (HC-ALLAHABAD) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=66597&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - The attempt on the part of Assessing Officer to reopen the assessment for the Assessment Year 2009-10 was by way of abundant caution. Notice is not valid, quashed
M/s AVS INFRACON PRIVATE LIMITED Versus INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 (1) (3) AND 1
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11363 (HC-GUJARAT) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=66598&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - U/s 14A r.w.r 8D(2)(iii) disallowance has to be computed only on the average value of investment giving rise to exempt income.
Pinebridge Investment Asset Management Company India Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11362 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section. 14A
-
ITAT - Not correct to hold that the payment against each bill/GR to each truck has to be considered as a separate contract and therefore no TDS applicable on individual payment for each GR less than Rs. 50,000.
Sri Shivamurthy vs. ACIT
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11361 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Sections. 194C, 40(a)(ia)
-
HC - CCIT to consider a 71 year old lady's compounding application, despite conviction order passed by Criminal Court against her.
R. Inbavalli vs. GOI/ITO
(2016) TaxCorp(LJ) 11360 (HC-MADRAS)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.