ITAT Delhi held that held that benefit of indexed cost of acquisition should be available to assessee based on payments made. Accordingly, AO directed to re-compute gain.
ITAT Delhi held that the cash deposited out of sales cannot be treated as income u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act once the sales are not disputed by the revenue.
ITAT Mumbai held that loss arising on settlement of contracts has to be treated as speculation loss and speculative losses are not eligible for set off against the non-speculation profit.
ITAT Mumbai held that rate of tax in case of foreign company is higher than rate of tax in case of domestic company and as per the Explanation in the Section 90, inserted in the IT Act with retrospective effect from 01-04-1962 the should not be regarded as violation of nondiscrimination clause.
ITAT Mumbai held that guarantee fees paid to holding company for loan advanced by assessee to third party is commercial/ business expediency and hence allowable as deduction under Section 37 of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that payment of guarantee fee to the Govt. of Gujarat in consideration of guarantee issued by it for repayment of unsecured loan is revenue expenditure.
ITAT Bangalore held that transfer of land specified as agricultural land in revenue records and which is used for agricultural operations, cannot be considered as transfer of capital asset. Hence not taxable under Capital Gains.
ITAT Delhi held that addition by invoking provisions of section 41(1) of the Income Tax Act unjustified as liability reflected as outstanding in books of accounts and there is no evidence that such liability has ceased during the year.
ITAT Chennai held that in case the assessee claims depreciation on the new asset, then, it cannot claim investment allowance under Section 32AC of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Chandigarh held that transaction not recorded at the time of survey qualify as unrecorded transactions, however, the assessee has provided the necessary explanation about the nature and source of such unrecorded transactions and hence invoking deeming provisions of section 69-69D of the Income Tax Act unjustified.
