"19 September 2015" Archive

No penalty where issue involved is predominantly and legally interpretative in nature: HC

Commissioner of Service Tax Vs Vijay Television (P) Ltd. (Madras High Court)

In the case of Commissioner of Service Tax Vs. Vijay Television (P) Ltd., it was held by Madras High Court that the decision of the Tribunal is correct in setting aside the demand of service tax for the period beyond the normal period of limitation prescribed under Section 73 of the Finance Act ...

Read More

Compensation received towards damage to the land is capital receipt

Jagan Nath Prasad & Sons Vs Income Tax Officer (ITAT Delhi)

The assessee has an agricultural land. During A.Y. 2010-11, M/s Indian Oil Coproration Ltd, had laid down the underground pipe-line. The Land of the assessee was in the way of pipe line to be laid down. For digging of land and laying the pipe-line, the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. ...

Read More

Where all critical functions & risk is assumed by AEs, it is not permitted to re-characterize the facilitation service provided as trading activity

Mitsui & Co. India Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi)

The two appeals filed against the order passed by the Deputy CIT were identical in facts and the issues rose. The core issue involved was the addition made by the AO on account of Arm’s length price determined by Transfer Pricing Officer and confirmed by Dispute Resolution Panel....

Read More

Imputed interest computed on deemed loan resulting from issue of equity shares less than the fair market value is not legally sustainable

First Blue Home Finance Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi)

First Blue Home Finance Ltd vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi)- The assessee was 100% Indian subsidiary of BHW Holding AG (BHW Germany) and was engaged in the business of providing loans to retail customers for the construction or purchase of residential properties in India. ...

Read More

TDS not applicable on Wheeling & Transmission charges u/s 194J/194I if agreement entered is on principal to principal basis

CIT Vs M/s. Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Limited (Bombay High Court)

The assessee company was incorporated on 31.05.2005 pursuant to the reorganization of the Maharashtra State Electricity Board.During the course of survey conducted on 18.12.2008, it was noticed that the assessee had made payment to MSETCL and PGCIL under the BPTAs without deducting tax at source....

Read More

There must be Validity of application filed before Settlement Commission

CIT Vs Income tax settlement commission & Rasiklal Kantilal & Co. (Bombay High Court)

The matter involves three assessment years, namely,2010-11,2011-12and 2012-13.The Assessee firm was engaged in the business of trading in ferrous and nonferrous metals. During a scrutiny assessment related to A.Y. 2010-11...

Read More

The assessee was not bound if the acceptance of disallowance is not conceded in the original return of income

CIT Vs M/s Everest Kento Cylinders Ltd (Bombay High Court)

The assessee company was engaged in the making of High Pressure Gas Cylinder and compressed natural gas cylinders. The assessee has subsidiary company at Dubai.The A.O. disallowed interest as per ruled 8D read with section 14A of the Act w.r.t to dividend income of Rs.3191330/-...

Read More

Failure of A.O. to dispose objections raised render re-assessment invalid

CIT Vs Tupperware India Pvt. Ltd. (Delhi High Court)

The assessee filed its return of income on 02.12.2013, which was processed u/s 143(1) at the returned income and accordingly refund order of Rs.20,16,957/- was issued. Subsequently A.O. based on reporting made by statutory auditor in the audit report in the form of 3CD u/s 44AB...

Read More

Any tax/duty paid in later year can be capitalized in the year in which obligation to pay arose

CIT Vs Noida Medicare Centre Ltd (Delhi High Court)

CIT vs Noida Medicare Centre Ltd (Delhi High Court) Even though the sales tax was paid in a subsequent year, the liability to pay sales tax arose in the accounting period relevant to the assessment year in which the machinery was purchased....

Read More

Sec. 40(b)(v)- ‘Allocable profit’ means book profit before partner’s remuneration: HC

CIT Vs Vaish Associates (Delhi High Court)

CIT vs. Vaish Associates (Delhi High Court) A plain reading of Clause 6(a) leads to a conclusion that the term' allocable profits' was used to mean 'book profits' as used in Section 40(b)(v)of the Act or otherwise the reference to the section in the Clause has no meaning. ...

Read More

Search Posts by Date

September 2021