ITAT Jaipur held that penalty under section 271B of the Income Tax Act not leviable as the assessee is eligible to avail the benefit of presumptive taxation up to Rs. 2 Crores as per section 44D of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Bangalore held that as assessee has no right to receive the interest accrued on Fixed Deposits due to prohibitory order, the same is not taxable.
CESTAT Allahabad held that service tax is leviable on services relating to health & fitness by way of teaching yoga and meditation under the category of ‘Health and Fitness Services’.
ITAT Bangalore held that denial of exemption under section 11 of the Income Tax Act unjustified as the primary activity of charitable trust is not run with profit motive. Accordingly, collection of money for micro financing in the form of interest on the loans advanced to the self help group members will not defeat the real object in order to deprive of the exemption.
ITAT Mumbai held that expenditure towards brand reminder, customer gifts, purchase of medical books and journals is not allowable expenditure u/s 37(1) of the Income Tax Act as such expenses are in the nature of free bees and prohibited.
Kerala High Court held that a trust, either private or public/charitable or otherwise, is a juristic person who is liable for punishment for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (NI Act).
ITAT Bangalore held that cooperative societies carrying on banking business when it pays interest to its members on deposits need not deduct tax at source in view of the provisions of Sec.194A(3)(v) of the Act.
ITAT Mumbai held that adjustment on account of examination of the arm’s-length price of the specified domestic transactions is not valid because of deletion of the provisions of Section 92BA (1) of the Act with effect from 1/4/2017. Provisions of Section 40A (2) of the act governs the allowability of those expenditure.
Telangana High Court held that once sanction has been given to a particular authority, i.e., the Deputy Director of Income Tax, the prosecution has to be launched by him alone and not by the Assistant Director of Income Tax. Thus, the authority which has initiated the prosecution must have sanction of law. Otherwise, it amounts to illegal action.
ITAT Mumbai held that provisions of section 13(2)(a) of the Income Tax Act does not authorise the Revenue to compute the notional interest. Accordingly, addition of notional interest deleted.
