Follow Us :

No reopening if no failure of assessee to disclose fully & truly all material facts necessary for assessment

October 16, 2020 1680 Views 0 comment Print

Reopening of assessment  under section 147 was not justified when there was no evidence to show that there was escapement of income due to failure on the part of assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment.

No TDS on commission paid to non-resident agent for effecting exports

October 13, 2020 3579 Views 0 comment Print

Device Driven (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs CIT (Kerala High Court) No TDS on commission paid to non-resident agent for effecting exports as it was not taxable under Income Tax Act Conclusion: Services rendered for effecting exports within India by assessee-company to foreign buyers would not attract income tax since the income was derived from the […]

SVLDR: Designated Committee cannot revisit the issue after determination 

October 12, 2020 2070 Views 0 comment Print

Designated Committee cannot revisit the issue if once made the determination under Section 127(4) r/w. Rule 6 of the SVLDR Scheme Rules, 2019

No TDS on discount/rebate allowed to dealers/distributors on sale of products

October 5, 2020 12684 Views 0 comment Print

Disallowance made by AO under section 40(a)(ia) for non deduction of TDS on discount/rebate allowed to dealers/distributors on sale of products was not justified as there was no element of work as defined under clause (iv) of Explanation to section 194C and AO had not brought on record any material for deduction of  TDS under section 194H that the dealers/distributors were simply acting as intermediaries to facilitate sale of products to end users so as to infer a principal–agent relationship.  

Income which did not accrue could not be taxed as business income

September 23, 2020 1377 Views 0 comment Print

Settlement received from the Government of India was not coming under the purview of the business income as there was no business during the period and income which had not accrued to assessee could not be termed as business income.

No revision u/s 263 merely on the basis of suspicions.

September 11, 2020 1602 Views 0 comment Print

Merely because the issue was not elaborately discussed in the quantum assessment could not be a ground to invoke revisional jurisdiction u/s 263 particularly when the details called for by AO were submitted and placed on record.

No applicability of proviso to section 2(15) if earning of surplus with no profit motive

August 26, 2020 2529 Views 0 comment Print

Merely earning surplus by assessee did not result into the conclusion, that assessee was carrying on its activities, which could be termed as business, trade, or commerce, charging a nominal fee to use coding system and to avail of advantages and benefits therein was neither reflective of business aptitude nor indicative of profit-oriented intent.  Accordingly, proviso to section 2(15) did not get attracted, and hence, there was no justification for denying exemption under section 11.

Deduction u/s 54F cannot be denied if a person holding one more residential property in joint name

August 25, 2020 3900 Views 0 comment Print

Disallowance of assessee’s claim for deduction under section 54F on the ground of assessee holding one more residential property in joint name along with his wife, could not be sustained as although in purchase deed, name of assessee was also there along with name of wife and purchase consideration of second residential property was paid by her out of joint/her individual bank account however, assessee’s wife was having sufficient own funds in that joint bank account received as her share in sale proceeds of shares. 

Disallowance of 10% expense justified in case of self made vouchers & non production of sub-contractors

August 7, 2020 1800 Views 0 comment Print

Where the books of accounts maintained by contractors were not accepted by the Department, the estimation of profit made on the basis of history of Gross Profit rate and Net Profit rate of assessee in the previous years or comparable cases of contractors could be made. Once such profit rates were compared, the additions on account of non confirmation or non production of the sub contractors, etc. was totally irrelevant and could not be made.

10% disallowance of expenditure towards sub-contract for want of proper bills was justified

August 7, 2020 2103 Views 0 comment Print

Since assessee-contractor carried out work for laying down road in a thermal power plant, therefore, there was no question of not incurring of expenditure by assessee to carry on road work contracts but the disallowance of whole expenditure towards sub contract work by AO for want of proper bills was not justified instead  disallowance of 10% of expenses made by appellate authorities was justified.

Search Post by Date
May 2024
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031