JCIT (Asst.) Vs. M/s. Bharath Beedi Works Ltd. (ITAT Bangalore) Objection of the AO is that borrowing from Directors and shareholders is not for business purpose. The AO has noted that even as per the assessee’s contention, if the assessee had an intention of starting a branch in Orissa, the same appears to have remained […]
While allowing the appeal filed by the assessee Kolkata bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) recently declared that penalty under Section 271C of the Income Tax Act would not attract when there is a short deduction of tax due to bonafied confusion.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Chennai, on Wednesday, brought in further clarity to one of its previous orders regarding the inclusiveness of private open terrace in build-up area of a flat, for the purpose of deductions as per Section 80-IB(10) of the Income Tax Act.
The Kolkata bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal recently ruled that Amusement Tax paid before the due date of filing of Income Tax Return is eligible for deduction under the Income tax Act, 1961.
We are of the view that donation given by assessee trust to a university approved under section 10(23C)(vi) is for charitable purpose subject to verification of the basic information which were not available on record, as per Ld. DR, such as:(i) Property from which the rental income of the trust has derived, that is rental agreement and assessee`s Trust entitlement to receive rental income.
ACIT Vs. Divi’s Laboratories Ltd. (ITAT Hyderabad) This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of CIT(A) – 5, Hyderabad dated 30/01/2016 relates to the AY 2012-13 wherein the revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. The ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the surcharge and education cess is to be […]
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Hyderabad on Wednesday ordered that the allowances received by a Member of Legislative Assembly is to be exempted from Income Tax.
Gaurav Seksaria Vs. ITO (ITAT Kolkata) Reimbursement of expense incurred during foreign visit to Director by Company is not taxable as Perquisite It is not in dispute that the assessee employee had not claimed any expenditure as deduction which were incurred by him through credit card during his foreign travel. He incurred expenses through credit […]
Contention of the assessee that the non-compete fee is the business expenditure of the assessee has been upheld. The assessee has always contended that it is its business expenditure and therefore, it was required to deduct the tax at source u/s 194J of the Act. For failure to deduct the tax inspite of being liable to do so, the penalty u/s 271 C is clearly leviable.
Since the assessee has not shown any profit nor paid any remuneration to any of the members, the provisions of section 40(ba) will not be attracted.
