Addition of amount representing 15% of sale proceeds deducted by the Monetary committee from e-auction sale of mineral stock belonging to assessee and which was contributed to Special Purpose Vehicle, as per the direction given by Hon’ble Supreme Court was justified as the same constituted trading receipts in the hands of assessee, but at the same time it was allowable as deduction u/s 37(1).
Addition of sum paid to Tata Sons Limited towards subscription paid for Brand Equity and Business Promotion Agreement was not justified as the said payment was made annually on a recurring basis for business purpose and the same was allowable as a revenue expense.
Once the books of account of assessee were rejected for want of supporting vouchers and details then the income of assessee was required to be estimated thus, there were no error or illegality in the impugned order of CIT(A) in estimating the income of assessee by applying N.P. at 1% which was a reasonable and justified.
If assessee was given a clean chit in the proceedings of the show cause notice, it might request the concerned authority to consider the case of extending the Export Obligation period which had been suspended presently and it would be for the authority to consider such a request at an appropriate time, if the factual circumstances based on the substantive material eventually tilt in favour of assessee.
Proposal to levy penalty on the ground that assessee- dealer purchased SAP software at concessional rate of tax against C Form Declarations without having included the same in the registration certificate issued under the CST Act was made by an officer, who was not the officer, who passed the order dated 30.1.2014, as there had been a transfer of the officer and the new officer took over charge thus, the defect, which had occurred by levying penalty without affording an opportunity of personal hearing would go to the root of the very levy itself, therefore, the assessment orders was remanded to AO for a fresh consideration.
Disallowance on account of interest on office loan was confirmed as assessee had taken loan from Bank for office and claimed deduction in respect of the interest expenditure incurred on this loan thus, the presumption based on mixed funds could not be applied.
CIT Vs Quest Global Engineering Services Pvt. Ltd. (Karnataka High Court) Conclusion: Loss sustained by assessee due to fluctuation in foreign exchange while implementing export contract was incidental to assessee’s course of business, therefore, such a loss was not a speculative loss but a business loss. Held: Assessee had entered into forward contract with the bank […]
Once the existence of dependent agency permanent establishment was wholly tax-neutral, unless it was shown that the agent had not been paid an arm’s length remuneration, and when it was not the case of AO that the agents had not been paid an arm’s length remuneration, the question regarding the existence of dependent agency permanent establishment, i.e., under article 5(4), was a wholly academic question.
Assessee had rightly claimed the deduction on account of improvement in the property being improvement in title of the property on being converted from leasehold Nazul land to freehold property as getting the property freehold will grant perfect ownership rights/title in favour of the existing lessee’s, who would then be in a position to transfer/sell the property.
Section 10A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) barred filing of applications for the commencement of the CIRP in respect of a corporate debtor for a default occurring on or after 25 March 2020, even if such application was filed before the date on which the amendment came into force i.e. 5 June 2020.
