On debatable issues, even if the addition in taxable turnover is made by the Assessing Officer, it does not amount to Best Judgment Assessment, which can be passed, only if the regular books of accounts and the return filed by the Assessee are rejected for given reasons
The assessee contended that the Assessing Officer has rightly allowed set off of income from other sources against other heads of income because up to assessment year 2016-2017 there was no prohibition on set off of losses. It was contended that the amendment to section 115BBE of the I.T.Act restricting the set off of any loss was inserted by the Finance Act, 2016 with effect from 01.04.2017 only, hence, not applicable to the concerned assessment year 2015-2016.
The assessee is one of the group companies of China based TIENS Group of Companies. The business of the assessee, is Trading/Distribution of Food Supplements and Health Care Equipments. The products dealt with by the Company are basically products manufactured at China or other places by Group concerns. Another Group Entity Tianjin Tianshi Biological Development Company Limited, incorporated at China has established a Foreign Branch Office in India.
Shyam Textiles Limited Vs Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Madras High Court) In the given case the crux of the problem lies in the order passed by the learned Commissioner under Section 28A of the Act, which is as brief and non speaking as it could be. The learned Commissioner, while exercising the powers under Section […]
Sree Sankeswara Foundations and Investments Vs ACIT (ITAT Chennai) The appellant namely M/s. Sree Sankeswara Foundations and Investments is a Partnership firm constituted under the Partnership Act. It is engaged in the business of real estate. The return of income for the AY 2016-17 was filed. Against the said return of income, the assessment was […]
The issue under consideration is whether the rental income earned by the assessee is taxable under the head “Income from House Property” as claimed by the assessee in the return of income or under the head “Income from Business” as held by the AO in the assessment order.
The Agreement refers to the US parent company of the Assessee having acquired license to use EDA tools from the vendors and the right of the Assessee to use the same and the fact that billing will be done on the Assessee on the basis of actual use of the software by the Assessee. It is thus clear that the Assessee had acquired no right or interest whatsoever in the EDA tools and had only a right to use the software. It is not the case of the revenue that the EDA tools was not connected to the business of the Assessee. In such circumstances, we are of the view that the deduction was rightly allowed by the CIT(A) as revenue expenditure.
Thus, it is seen that there is actually no sale of property by the assessees before us and the Sale Deed has been executed by the original owners through GPA holders to the children of assessees. Therefore, in my opinion, there is no transfer of property by the assessees in fact it is acquisition of property by the assessees in the names of their children and it is not the case of transfer or gain on sale of property.
PCIT Vs Electro Urban Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd. (Calcutta High Court) The issue under consideration is whether interest on deposits/securities, which strictly speaking accrues to the members’ account, could be taxed as business income under section 28 of Income Tax Act, 1961? Supreme Court said, such interest income would come in the category of income […]
The issue under consideration is that confirming the addition made u/s 68 by A.O. in respect of the loan taken from father of the appellant on mere suspicion.
