The contention of the revenue was that the intention of the Legislature is to benefit those institutions which cater to variety of illness and suffering as a service to the society and solely for philanthropic purpose and not for the purpose of profit.
, High Court inter-alia held that mere fact that an entity makes high/extremely high profits/losses does not, ipso facto, lead to its exclusion from the list of comparables for the purposes of determination of ALP.
Judgment in case of Amrit Banaspati Company Ltd.- The Hon’ble High Court upheld the Constitutional Validity of the amended Section 29(4) in entirety and dismissed the writ petitions. The basic grievances of the petitioners were that the Amendment of Section 29(4) was prospective and not retrospective.
Punjab & Haryana High Court held In the case of Principal CIT vs. M/s Mobisoft Tele Solutions Pvt. Ltd. that Tarun Mohan had obtained the copyright in respect of the artistic work comprised in the name phoneytunes.com. Registration of the copyright is, however, not compulsory.
Revenue challenged the order passed by ITAT which confirmed the order of CIT (A) that expenditure incurred i.e. payment of royalty for technical knowhow in terms of Technical Collaboration Agreement (TCA Agreement) is an allowable expenditure as no benefit was obtained by the Assessee for the period beyond the relevant assessment years.
Revenue challenged the order passed by ITAT majorly on three grounds. Firstly, on ground of adopting value of property as per the value provided by registered valuer instead of value adopted by AO on the basis of report of DVO.
The Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of M/s Joy Foam P. Ltd held that the input credit of inputs need not to be reversed even in case the payment of duty has been ordered to be remitted under Rule 49 of Central Excise Rules, 2002.
The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of HCL Technologies Ltd. held that completed cannot be reopened after the expiry of four years from the end of relevant assessment year unless the income escaped from tax is attributable to assessee’s failure to disclose full & true disclosure of the facts.
Punjab & Haryana High Court held In the case of The CIT Vs Bharat Bhushan held that no addition is sustainable where the purchases had been accounted for in the regular books of accounts maintained, duly audited and there is nothing to show that the quantity had been purchased and sold outside the books.
In the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. DLF Commercial Project Corporation Delhi High Court held that Advance received cannot be treated as income of the assessee and TDS is not deductible on reimbursement of Expenses since it is not an income.
