In the case of Travelport LP USA Vs. DDIT Delhi Bench of ITAT observed that assessee has a dependent agent in form of distributor in India and held that assessee has a business connection in India u/s 9(1) (i) of the act and its income is deemed to accrue or arise in India.
It has come to the notice of the Institute that upon resignation of the members in employment either as Company Secretary or Key Managerial Personnel, the employer companies are not accepting resignation and not relieving such members from their duties.
Trade Circular No. 19T of 2015 A dealer seeking registration under the Maharashtra Value added Tax Act, 2002 submits an online application for registration along with the required documents. The Registration Officer to whom such application gets allocated generates the TIN if the application is found to be correct and is supported with the appropriate documents.
CIT Vs. Gujarat Reclaim & Rubber Products (Bombay High Court) (a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstance of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in holding that commission payments made to nonresident sales agents on which no tax was deducted is not disallowable u/s. 40(a)(i)?
CIT Vs. V/s. M/s. Thyssen Krupp Industries India Pvt. Ltd. (Bombay High Court) Whether on the facts and the circumstance of the case and law, the Tribunal was justified in law in restricting the Transfer Pricing (TP) adjustment only to the transaction between the Associated Enterprises (AEs.)?
Abani Kumar Dutta Vs. ACIT (ITAT Kolkata) Argument of Ld. Counsel for the assessee that the CIT in his revision order u/s 263 of the Act only directed the AO to examine the applicability of sec. 194G read with section 40(a)(ia) of the Act and not genuineness of the expenditure.
Krypton Industries Ltd. V/s. DCIT (ITAT Kolkata)- Whether the action of AO for framing the assessment under section 147 is within his jurisdiction though the time for scrutiny assessment under section 143(3) has not lapsed.
Deepak Nagji Vira Vs. ITO (ITAT Mumbai) The monies are borrowed, incurring brokerage charges for the purpose, only for lending the same to a company at a predefined, agreed rate of interest, i.e., 12% p.a. That is, the assessee
ITAT Pune held In the case of Span Overseas Ltd. vs. CIT that from the show cause notice, it is clear that the CIT has invoked the provisions of section 263 on the proposal submitted by the DCIT and deficiencies in the assessment order pointed out by the DCIT.
Mangi Lal Sethia Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata) In this present case, we find no live link between the reason to believe and reopening of case u/s 147 of the Act. It was a loan entry in the books of the assessee and the same was also settled within the same year.
