Where assessee-school had provided transport facility by charging separate fee, the transportation activity being incidental to achieve the main object of the assessee-trust, i.e., providing education could not be considered as business activity, so as to deny exemption under section 11 because the transport facility was not provided to outsiders and was confined only to the students and staff of the assessee.
Hallmark Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of GST & Central Excise (CESTAT Chennai) During the adjudication proceedings appellants have contended that the said activities were undertaken before sale of land took place, hence the service was a self-service and there is no service provider and service recipient relationship and therefore they are not liable for […]
Purviben Snehalbhai Panchhigar Vs ACIT (Gujarat High Court) In the present case the Assessing Officer has heard the material on record which would prima facie suggest that the assessee had sold number of shares of a company which was found to be indulging in providing bogus claim of long term and short term capital gain. […]
Commissioner of Value Added Tax Vs Otis Elevator Company (India) Ltd. (Delhi High Court) The placement of an order by the agent for procurement of the lifts, in this case, was merely an offer. It is only upon its acceptance and further steps taken by the supplier that an offer crystallizes into a binding promise […]
ACIT Vs Mr. Bipin N. Sagar (ITAT Mumbai) Appellant has stated that the transfer is of one residential house. The three adjoining flats were merged and made it one residential house not by the Appellant but by previous owner. The Appellant ever since the date of purchase used it as one residential house. There is […]
Supreme Court allows appeal, criticizes High Court’s technical view on delay. Directs consideration on merits due to pending similar issue in the High Court.
DCIT Vs Avtec Ltd. (ITAT Delhi) Deduction prescribed under section 10AA cannot be treated in the nature of exemption and as such, loss suffered by assessee in its unit eligible for deduction under section 10AA could be set off against normal business income. Keeping in view the fact that section 10AA makes the assessee eligible […]
Interest earned on deposit of surplus funds could not be taxed as business income in view of the fact assessee was not in the business of money-lending.
Since both the employee’s and employer’s contribution to Provident Fund was covered under the amended provision of section 43B, therefore Employees contribution to Provident fund (EPF), beyond the due date stipulated under the Provident Fund Act but before the due date of filing return of income under section 139(1) could not be disallowed by invoking section 43B of Income Tax Act, 1961.
Kay Dee Industries Vs JCIT (ITAT Delhi) Since it was not the first year of the payment of commission to the party and the recipient of the commission income was also not related party in terms of section 40A(2), therefore, revenue was only authorized to see whether the expenditure was laid out or by the […]
