ITAT Delhi held that as assessee disclosed all the material facts relating to payment of non-compete fee, assessee cannot be accused of furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Accordingly, penalty u/s 271(1)(c) not leviable.
ITAT Bangalore held that deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) or 80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act is not available in respect of interest income earned from scheduled banks.
Gauhati High Court held that writ petition not entertained as alternative and efficacious remedy is available to the petitioner. Accordingly, tax payer directed to avail statutory remedy, which is more efficacious.
NCLAT Chennai held that if there is any breach of the Terms of Settlement, it cannot be construed as an issue which would fall within the ambit of the definition of Oppression and Mismanagement as defined under the Companies Act, 1956.
ITAT Amritsar held that transfer of REC (Renewable Energy Certificate) is capital in nature and not liable to tax under business income as the income is offshoot from environmental concern not from offshoot of business concern.
Bombay High Court held that in absence of any specific provisions in the statute, duty or penalty liability of the company cannot be recovered from its Director, who is not personally liable towards liability of the Company.
ITAT Cochin held that prior to 1st June 2015, there was no provision enabling demand in respect of levy of fees u/s 234E for late filing of TDS/ TCS statement. Accordingly, imposition of late fees prior to 1st June 2015 is bad-in-law.
ITAT Bangalore held that pre-clinical laboratory services rendered by the assessee (non-resident) to its customers in India would not be chargeable to tax in India as the technical services rendered by the affiliates do not “make available” technical knowledge, experience, skill, know-how or process while preparing these reports for their, Indian customers/ clients.
ITAT Mumbai held that determination of Arm’s Length Price (ALP) of intra group services at Rs. Nil is not justified as the assessee has maintained a reasonably sound documentation of intra group services.
ITAT Kolkata held that addition of advances received by the company as deemed dividend in terms of provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act unsustainable as advances are received from the concerns purely as business transaction.
