Held that the authorities fallen in error in considering the subscription received towards cloud serviced to be royalty income
ITAT Patna held that in absence of any evidence of tax evasion by showing fictitious or false transactions, addition by invoking provisions of section 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act unsustainable.
Held that an inquiry made by the AO, considered inadequate by the Commissioner of Income Tax, cannot make the order of the Assessing Officer erroneous. Thus, the Commissioner of Income Tax by invoking revisionary powers u/s. 263 cannot impose his own understanding of the extent of inquiry.
Held that deduction u/s 54F is available against new residential house acquired outside India as provisions of section 54F doesn’t use the word ‘in India’.
Held that interest earned out of the fixed deposit made from the surplus funds being not connected to the manufacturing activity and do not form an integral part of the profits derived from industrial unit is not eligible for deduction
Held that in case there are two possible views and the AO has taken one of the possible views, no action to exercise powers of revision can arise.
Held that Rule 16 allows the assessee to avail the cenvat credit of duty paid on the goods cleared by them, as if such goods are received as inputs
Held that addition, only on the basis of information received from investigation wing ignoring all the evidences filed by the assessee, is unsustainable in law
Held that as the assessee had complied sufficiently the requirement of law as stipulated in section 80IB(10) of the Act and as per the said provision it was bound to complete the building project before 31.03.2012. Deduction u/s 80IB(10) allowed.
Held that when there is a delay, a late fee u/s 234E and 200A of the Act is automatic and there is no discretion not to levy late fees with the TDS Officer.
