ITAT held that the amount received by the assessee from sale of software and provision of software related services cannot be treated as royalty under Article 12(3) of the India – Singapore DTAA.
It is clear that, the transactions in respect of trading in derivatives referred to in Clause (ac) of Section 2 of Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956 carried in a recognized stock exchange are excluded from the definition of ‘speculation transaction’ described under Section 43 (5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
This Court finds that the claim/dues of the creditors are required to be settled by the OL in the manner and priority, as prescribed under the Act of 1956. The State dues, in no way, can have preference over the dues/claims of the workmen and other secured creditors.
Reopening is on the wrong assumption of facts and the information received from another assessing officer would not by itself be the basis to have a belief that the income has escaped assessment. Accordingly, we find the reassessment is bad in law and quash the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act.
Valco Industries Ltd Vs ACIT (ITAT Chandigarh) Facts- The assessee originally filed return declaring total income of Rs.4,83,83,620/- on 28.09.2012 after claiming deduction of Rs.5,75,64,789/- u/s 80IC of the Act. The assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act on 27.03.2015 at an income of Rs.8,07,03,620/- after making an addition of Rs.3,23,20,000/- on account of […]
Software maintenance fees, consulting charges and training fees which are incidental to software license fee, assumes same character as that of software license fee. We held that the consideration received towards software license fee cannot be termed as Royalty.
Held that order of CIT(A) sustained on the issue restricting the disallowance of non-capitalization of interest on bank loan on Plant & Machinery and on account of non-capitalization of interest expenditure on Capital Work in Progress u/s 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act.
Jurisdiction of AO in cases where section 143(2) notices issued for limited scrutiny is confined to claims AO set out in notice
Union of India Vs Delhi State Consumer Co Operative Federation Ltd. (Delhi High Court) Facts- According to Union of India, Delhi State Consumers Co-operative Federation Limited (respondent) failed to furnish the requisite security deposit, as a result of which each of the contracts were cancelled at the risk and cost of the respondent. The Union […]
New Delhi Municipal Council Vs Minosha India Limited (Supreme Court) Facts- The foremost question which falls for determination is that whether Section 60(6) of the IBC gives rise to a new lease of life to a proceeding at the instance of the corporate debtor on the basis of a moratorium which is put in place […]
