In this case ITAT examined that whether Arm’s Length Price (ALP) adjustments will also be warranted in case of interest free loans extended as quasi capital and what are the connotations of expression ‘quasi capital’ in the context of the transfer pricing legislation.
Dheeraj Amin Vs. ACIT (ITAT Banglore),- In this case ITAT examined the issue that where an assessee entered into an land development agreement by holding land as stock-in-trade, the expected business profits arose as a result of agreement can be taxed as income from capital gain.
115JB lays down that every assessee for the purpose of this section shall prepare its Profit & loss account for the relevant previous year in accordance with the provisions of part II & III of Schedule 6 of the Companies Act, 1956.
The ITAT Chennai in the case of DCIT vs. M/s. Rattha Citadines held that relying on the same information as available on the date of filing original return of income in filling revised return but making a different claim , in the absence of assessee’s bonafide expenditure would be deemed as furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income making assessee liable to face penalty u/s 271(1)(c).
ITAT Pune held in the case The ACIT vs. M/s. Ambarwadikar & Co., Engineers & Contractors that It is clear that the bill raised by the assessee has been accepted by the department and for whatever reason some amount was not paid during F.Y. 2001-02 but the fact remains that there is no such dispute as claimed by the assessee.
The transaction of allowing credit period to the AE on realization of sale proceeds is not an independent transaction and has to be considered along with the main international transaction of sale of goods.
In the impugned year the blood relation is not necessary for the gift to be a genuine gift, but the relationship matters a lot. In all the probabilities the gift is found to be genuine as the donors have explained the source of gift, copy of bank accounts, income tax return.
The Tribunal upheld the contention of the Assessee and also relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. MKJ Enterprises which held that factoring charges were not interest and as such, provisions of TDS are not applicable.
The assessee is a dealer of sarees and AO while framing the assessment disallowed karigar /embroidery charges by invoking the provision of section 40(a)(ia) of the act for non-deduction of TDS u/s 194C of the Act.
The Assessing Officer while computing the total wealth of the assessee added the value of the let-out properties i.e. godown and offices in the total wealth of the assessee for the purpose of calculating the wealth-tax.
