"16 January 2013" Archive

S. 54F – If two flats were joined together before assessee became owner, the same will be considered as one

CIT Vs Mr. Raman Kumar Suri (Bombay High Court)

Though the respondent-assessee had purchased flat Nos. 416A and 516A it was only purchase of one residential house. Further, the Tribunal held that two flats were joined together before the respondent assessee became the owner of the two flats. The Certificate from the society also established the fact that two flat Nos. 416A and 516A wer...

Principal of principle of netting applies if sufficient nexus exist between interest received & paid

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs UK Bose (Delhi High Court)

The netting principle was adopted by a Division Bench of this Court in Shri Ram Honda Power Equip (supra). That was a case concerning Section 80HHC which provides for a deduction from export profits. Explanation (baa) provided for exclusion of certain income which had nothing to do with the export profit and one such item of income was in...

Whether Service provider can claim reimbursement of service tax paid by him on services provided to service receiver

M/S Bhagwati Security Services (Regd.) Vs Union Of India & Others (Allhabad High Court)

Service tax is statutory liability. It is a tax which is required to be collected by the service provider from the person to whom service is provided, and thereafter to be deposited with government treasury within the prescribed time....

Penalty u/s 272B is prospective & applicable from 01.06.2006

Canara Bank Vs The Income Tax Officer(TDS) (ITAT Chandigarh)

The provisions of Penalty levied u/s 272B of Income Tax Act, 1961 are prospective i.e. it is applicable from the date of insertion of sub-clause (iv) to section 139A(5B) of the Act i.e. 01.06.2006....

‘Pooja expenses’ in temple located inside factory premises is for business purpose & allowable

CIT(Central-I) Vs M/s. Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd. (Delhi High Court)

Expenses were incurred on the maintenance and puja of the colony temple at Dalmiapuram, Salem and the Hospet works. It appears from para 6.1 of the order of the CIT (Appeals) that he visited the factory at Dalmiapuram to verify the fact that the temple was located inside the factory of the assessee company. He found that it was a small vi...

Phone Numbers of DIN Cell; and Help Desk w.e.f. 17.01.2013

PHONE NUMBERS OF DIN CELL AND HELP DESK  Stakeholders are hereby informed  that operator for MCA21 project is changing w.e.f. 17.01.2013 from M/s. TCS Ltd to M/s. Infosys Ltd. Due to this the new contact numbers for DIN Cell and Help desk will be :...

Posted Under: Income Tax |

ITAT asked AO to determine if payment for software service is FTS or Royalty

Goldman Sachs Services (P.) Ltd. Vs Deputy Director of Income-tax (International Taxation) (ITAT Bangalore)

From a perusal of the order of assessment, we find that all the submissions of the assessee before the Assessing Officer and his findings thereon are only in respect of whether the payment made by the assessee to the consultant M/s. IBM Corporation, USA was or was not taxable in India as royalty under Article 12(3) of the India-USA, DTAA ...

Delay in passing of review order by CCE cannot be condoned

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs KAP Cones (CESTAT New Delhi)

Apex Court in in the case of M.M. Rubber Co. (supra) of held that power under section 35E is a power of superintendence conferred on a superior authority to ensure that the subordinate officers exercise their powers under the Act correctly and properly and when a time limit is prescribed for exercise of this power,...

Order passed cannot be recalled of reviewed on plea that advocate engaged by liquidator was lacking an authority to represent

Rajeev S Mardia and Rasik S Mardia Vs Official Liquidator of Mardia Steel Ltd. (In Liquidation) (Gujarat High Court)

In our view, we do not find any substance for the alleged ulterior motive or collusion by Mr. Desai with the OL, since no material is produced to show that any undue benefits was to be derived by the OL. Be it noted that the appeal is not preferred by the OL, but is preferred by the applicant herein in capacity as Party-in-person against ...

S. 148 Notice to every partner in the case of a firm is not necessary

Y. Narayana Chetty And Another Vs The Income-Tax Officer (Supreme Court of India)

A notice in the case of a firm need not necessarily be issued to each and every one of its partners - Y. Narayana Chetty v. ITO [1959] 35 ITR 388 (SC)....

Search Posts by Date

February 2024