All these, provisions of agreement would, therefore, indicate that license that has been granted is that of a fully established running hotel authorizing the licensee to operate the hotel for a specified period subject to the terms and conditions incorporated therein.
Bhavani Gems Vs. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) We have heard the rival contentions and perused relevant material on record including cited orders of Tribunal in assessee’s case for different years. Upon perusal of the same, we find strength in the argument of Ld. AR since the assessee’s claim for additional depreciation has been allowed in subsequent […]
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Bangalore bench while dismissing revenues appeal recently ruled that Credit co-operative society engaged in providing credit facilities, etc., to its members is eligible for deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Erada Gopi Chand Vs. Union Of India & Anr. (Delhi High Court) The primary ground of challenge raised in this writ petition is to the effect that once having accorded a certification to a film under Section 5A of the Cinematograph Act, 1952, the Central Board of Film Certification, constituted by the Central Government under […]
Tribunal found that roaming charges cannot be considered as fee for technical services, therefore, the provisions of Section 194J of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is not applicable.
Touching Heart Ministries Vs. ITO (ITAT Visakhapatnam) In the instant case, the donations were received for specific purpose for acquiring the fixed assets. This is evidenced by the letters placed before us from the donors. The funds are not freely available to the assessee society, for utilizing its objectives other than acquiring specified assets. The […]
AO to treat the interest income temporarily parked in the banks and given as unsecured loan which yielded income and which has been offered to tax by the assessee should be treated as income from business and not from other sources.
M/s. Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Ltd. Vs. JCIT (OSD) (ITAT Visakhapatnam) The assessee company has created a provision under the head ’Future Leave Encashment’. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee company was asked to explain how the amount debited towards the provision for future leave encashment can be allowed as deduction. In response to […]
In the instant case, the tax has not deducted the TDS due to wrong classification of the payments made which was included under the heading ‘purchases’ and the purchases do not attract the TDS, whereas the sub contract payments attract TDS.
Dis allowance on account of VAT not pad of Rs.1,78,334/- was made by the AO only because of erroneous auditor’s report and it has been brought to our notice how the error has occurred and we find that assessee’s contentions are backed by records, therefore, we being the final fact finding authority, find that it was the mistake of the auditor who has wrongly given the figures and made wrong observation because of which the AO made the dis allowance. However, the AO before making the dis allowance could have asked the assessee to explain before making the dis allowance.
