Exemption claimed by the assessee under S.54 of the Act cannot be denied on the ground that the assessee has not utilised the sale consideration received from the sale of flats itself, in purchasing the plot. Law is well settled by the judicial precedents that investment in purchase of pot for construction of house would entitle an assessee to claim exemption u/s.54 or 54F of the Act. Board’s circular No.667 dated 18.10.1993 also says so.

Admittedly, the assessee is not a dealer in foreign exchange. For the purpose of hedging the loss due to fluctuation in foreign exchange while implementing   the export contracts, the assessee had entered into forward contract with   the banks.  In some cases,   the export could not be executed and the    assessee had to pay certain charges       [...]

debates in the Parliament are ordinarily not considered as the aids for interpretation of the ultimate provision which may be brought into the statute. The debates at best indicate the opinion of the individual members and are ordinarily not relied upon for interpreting the provisions, particularly when the provisions are plain. We are conscious that [...]

The    revenue authorities had imposed penalty on the ground that deduction under section 80HHC of the Act was   wrongly claimed. The Tribunal however, deleted  such penalty. The Tribunal noted that    tax liability against the assessee was confirmed on the basis of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of  CIT v. Ravindranathan Nair, [...]

Only reason advanced for making disallowance out of the interest paid to two coparceners was that the interest paid to other parties was at 12% per annum. We find that the interest paid to two coparceners at the rate of 15% could not be said to be excessive, considering the prevailing rate of interest during [...]

The impugned amount was not in the nature of penalty on account of disobedience or infraction of any law. In fact, the assessee being in the business of execution of Civil Construction work, therefore under an obligation to complete the contract within a specified time and in case of delay, he is subject to liquidated [...]

In our view, merely because the suppliers have not appeared before the Assessing Officer or the CIT(A), one cannot conclude that the purchases were not made by the respondent-assessee.

Vodafone India Services P. Ltd. Vs. DCIT (ITAT Mumbai), ITA No.7140 /Mum/2012, Date of Pronouncement: 26/4/2013 The dispute is regarding selection of comparables for bench marking the international transaction entered into by the assessee. The assessee had selected 9 comparables as unrelated parties for comparing the transaction in case of the assessee. The AO further [...]

The stand of the revenue that expenditure incurred by the society on giving presents to as own members would amount to expenditure on itself or application of its income to its members also could not be countenanced as the society was entirely a separate entity

Forward transactions in commodities may fall within proviso (a) to section 43(5) of the Act, it is necessary that the raw materials or merchandise in respect of which the forward transactions have been made by the assessee must have a direct connection with the goods manufactured or the merchandise sold by him.