Amit Jain Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata)- Assessee made a foreign trip to Roam, Dubai and Kathmandu and claimed expenses at Rs. 1,45,151/-. Assessing Officer required the assessee to produce the evidence and also business purposes. Assessee stated that foreign tour was for surveying interiors of foreign hotels and resorts at the request of his client Arneja Creation & Hotels (P) Ltd. who wanted interiors of their hotel project at Darjeeling in similar fashion as those at Kathmandu. Assessee explained that tour to Roam was for the purpose of exploring prospectus of importing special type of Marbles for interior decoration and Dubai was a stop-over en-route to Rome. Assessing Officer in the absence of evidence treated 20% of foreign trip expenses as personal in nature and disallowed a sum of Rs. 29,003/-. We find that none of the authorities below have denied that this is not for the purpose of business. Once it is not denied, the foreign trip expenses cannot be disallowed on ad-hoc basis.
If two views are possible than Assessing Officers should take the one favourable to the Assessee and penalty for concealment cannot be levied. CIT Vs Mahavir Irrigation Pvt Ltd (Delhi High Court)- In this case, there is no finding that any details supplied by the assessee in its Return were found to be incorrect or erroneous or false.
XBRL is a data-rich dialect of XML (Extensible Markup Language), the universally preferred language for transmitting information via the Internet. It was developed specifically to communicate information between businesses and other users of financial information, such as analysts, investors and regulators. XBRL provides a common, electronic format for business reporting. It does not change what is being reported. It only changes how it is reported
Havells India Ltd Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi)- It has been held that where services have been rendered outside India and have been utilised for the purpose of making or earning any income from any source outside India, such payments would fall outside the purview of Section 9(1)(vii) of the Act and will not be deemed to accrue or arise in India.
ITO Vs Bajaj Hindustan Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai)- There is not dispute that the payment in question made by Assessee to KPMG is in respect of services which otherwise fell within the definition of FTS as given in the Act. The dispute is whether the exceptions mentioned in clause (b) to Sec.9(1)(vii) of the Act would apply so that it can be said that the fees in the nature of FTS has not accrued or arisen to KPMG in India.
Nippon Keiji Kyokoi Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai)- Notwithstanding a change in the position by the assessee, the Tribunal has held that the effective connection with the permanent establishment in India has to be determined based on a functional test in the case of fees for technical services . Furthermore, the Tribunal also upheld that if the services are said to have been effectively connected with the permanent establishment, the income would be taxable only as business profits to the extent of attribution and the balance income would not be liable to tax in India as fees for technical services .
ITO Vs Omni Globe information Technologies India (P) Ltd (ITAT Delhi)- Business is set up when it reaches a stage where it is in a position to procure business and not before. However, the expenditure becomes deductible from such stage, irrespective of the date of actual receipt of the business. The assessee-company had been incorporated on 19 March 2004 for carrying out the business of the BPO. It incurred the expenditure of Rs 59,24,809 under various heads in the months of April and May, 2004. Although the staff had been recruited, it was not ready to render services as the staff had to be trained with the systems.
ACIT Vs Pramod H. Lele (ITAT Mumbai)- The Stock Option Plan had granted only an ‘option to buy’ a specified number of shares in a specified timeframe at a specified price, subject to the fulfilment of other conditions set out in the plan. There was no compulsion on the part of the assessee to acquire the shares. In other words, the Stock Option Plan only allowed the assessee to get benefit from the increase in the market price of the shares between the date of grant and the date of sale of shares. Therefore, where only stock options were issued and stood in the name of employees and no payment was made until the date of exercise, mere grant of an option does not result in a transfer of shares.
Shri Prashant H Shah Vs ACIT (Ahmedabad ITAT)- It is further important to mention that vide an amendment with effect from 1/6/2007 an individual or HUF have also been inducted vide sub-clause (k) in section 194C(1) of the IT Act. At this juncture, it is worth to hold that as far as the AY in hand is concerned, i.e. AY 2007-08, this latest amendment of section 194C(1)(k) of the Act being introduced with effect from 01/06/2007 has no applicability.
CIT, Chennai Vs M/s Simpson & Co. (Madras High Court)- There must be a nexus between the material at the hands of the Officer and formation of belief that there was escapement of wealth from assessment on account of the failure of the assessee to disclose fully and truly, all material facts. In the absence of any nexus or any one of the requirements, the reassessment proceedings could not be upheld as one falling under Section 17 of the Wealth Tax Act.
