"13 July 2018" Archive

Use PAN to check compliance for a single foreign portfolio investor: SEBI

CIRCULAR No. IMD/FPIC/CIR/P/2018/114 13/07/2018

a) Use Permanent Account Number (PAN) issued by Income Tax Department of India for checking compliance for a single foreign portfolio investor; and b) Obtain validation from Depositories for the foreign portfolio investors who have invested in the particular primary market issuance to ensure there is no breach of investment limit within t...

Read More

CBDT amends Income Tax Advance ruling Forms

Notification No. 31/2018-Income Tax [G.S.R. 647(E) 13/07/2018

Income-tax (7th Amendment) Rules, 2018- CBDT seeks unique number for identification of non-resident- CBDT amends Forms for advance ruling -Notification No. 31/2018-Income Tax Dated 13th July, 2018 MINISTRY OF FINANCE (Department of Revenue) (CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES) Notification No. 31/2018-Income Tax New Delhi, the 13th July, 2018 ...

Read More

No tax on Mesne Profits for wrongful deprivation of use & occupation of property

Income-tax Officer Vs Shri Kamal Kumar Ghosh (ITAT Kolkata)

Special Bench of Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Narang Overseas Pvt Ltd vs ACIT reported in 111 ITD 1 (Mum ITAT ) (SB) had held that mesne profits received by assessee for wrongful deprivation of use and occupation of property constitutes capital receipt and hence not chargeable to tax. Respectfully following the same , we hold that the l...

Read More

Cenvat credit allowable on Transportation of Samples by Courier

M/s Poddar Pigments Ltd. Vs CCE, Jaipur (CESTAT Delhi)

M/s Poddar Pigments Ltd. Vs CCE, Jaipur (CESTAT Delhi) Courier services stand utilised by the appellant for sending the samples to their prospective buyers and for procuring orders from them. Ld. Advocate also explains that they are not charging their buyers for the said samples, though duty is being paid by them on the deemed […]...

Read More

Addition for Difference between incomes in TDS certificate and declared in return

ACIT, Circle-37 (1) New Delhi Vs Rajiv Nayar (ITAT Delhi)

ACIT Vs Rajiv Nayar (ITAT Delhi) The AO, based on TDS  information, assessed the corresponding professional income, on accrual basis, in the relevant year. Whereas the appellant’s contention is that since he has offered professional receipts for tax on cash/receipt basis as he follows cash system of accounting; therefore, charging...

Read More

Personal information like T.A. bill cannot be directed to be given under RTI Act, 2005

Chhattisgarh Board of Secondary Education Vs Public Information Officer (Chhattisgarh High Court)

Personal information like T.A. bill etc. cannot be directed to be given under the Right to Information Act, 2005 in view of Section 8(1)(j) of the said Act....

Read More

Amount received towards reimbursement of cost cannot be taxed

Gemological Institute International Inc. Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai)

Tribunal after going through the terms of the agreement has held that the reimbursement of cost cannot be considered to be part of fee for technical services, hence, is not taxable. ...

Read More

Addition for Bogus expenditure U/s. 69C justified on failure to prove rendition of services

Sun Steel Industries (P) Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Kolkata)

Where assessee had not proved actual rendition of the foundation services and also whether alleged service providers possessed necessary expertise and infrastructure to render the foundation services, AO was justified in making addition of payments made to them, under section 69C....

Read More

No addition in Section 153A assessment for unexplained share capital In absence of incriminating material

M/s. Garg Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Kolkata)

In respect of assessments completed prior to date of search that have not abated, the scope of proceedings under section 153A has to be confined only to material found during search. As no material, whatsoever, was found in the course of search, question of making addition on account of unexplained share capital could not have been the su...

Read More

NOIDA authority is not Municipality and not eligible for exception U/s. 10(20)

New Okhla Industrial Development Authority Vs CCIT (Supreme Court)

New Okhla Industrial Development Authority Vs CCIT (Supreme Court) Appellant namely ‘New Okhla Industrial Development Authority; claimed that he is covered by Clause (ii) of the Explanation to Section 10(2) i.e. Municipality as referred to in clause (e) of Article 243P of the Constitution. We, while discussing above provisions, have...

Read More

Search Posts by Date

July 2021