Sponsored
    Follow Us:

All ITAT

Revisionary power u/s. 263 can be exercised on matters never raised by AO during assessment

October 19, 2012 1763 Views 0 comment Print

There was no enquiry by the Assessing Officer on the issues raised by the CIT in his order u/s. 263 of the Act. The lack of enquiry or inadequate enquiry by the Assessing Officer could be very much reason for assuming jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act.

Penalty imposable for Accepting cash Loan without reasonable cause

October 19, 2012 6536 Views 0 comment Print

The assessee must prove beyond the shadow of the doubt there existed a reasonable cause for not complying with the conditions contained in section 269SS of the Act. Circumstances under which the cash was accepted must be explained. Unfortunately no cogent material was produced in that direction.

TPO not justified in rejecting computation of ALP made by assessee by applying CUP method if all comparables are fairly unrelated

October 19, 2012 1667 Views 0 comment Print

It is a fact on record that the assessee has adopted the CUP method for computing the Arms’ Length Price for the international transaction entered into by it with its AE for the medical transcription service rendered by it to the AE. In this regard, the assessee has considered two external comparables and three internal comparables.

S. 11(2) – Income Accumulation can’t be questioned if trust furnishes the purpose

October 18, 2012 16374 Views 0 comment Print

Section 11(1) provides subject to the provisions of section 60 to 63, the income which is derived from property held under trust wholly for charitable or religious purposes, to the extent to which such income is applied to such purposes in India; and, where any such income is accumulated or set apart for application to such purposes in India,

Deeming Provision U/s. 50C cannot be applied to Purchase to make addition U/s. 69B

October 18, 2012 1583 Views 0 comment Print

In the case of Harley Street Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (supra) it has been held that provisions of Sec.50C are applicable only for computation of capital gains in real estate transaction in respect of seller only and not for the purchaser. Legal fiction cannot be extended any further and has to be limited to the area for which it is created.

Full value of consideration cannot be substituted by market value unless there is a proof for extra consideration

October 18, 2012 3812 Views 0 comment Print

Honourable Madras High Court in case of A.S. Jayakumar (supra) has held that unless there is a proof for extra consideration paid by the purchaser over and above what is stated in the sale deed, section 52(2) of the I T Act cannot be invoked.

TDS u/s. 194C on payments to agents of truck-owners?

October 18, 2012 2141 Views 0 comment Print

So far as pre June 2008 position is concerned, tax withholding obligations under section 194 C in respect of an individual only in cases where the payments were made to a sub contractor for carrying out a part off work, or the work itself, undertaken by the assessee and that too when such individual’s turnover from business or profession exceeded threshold specified in section 44AB.

Search Assessment cannot be reopened u/s. 147 on the basis of same material

October 18, 2012 4093 Views 0 comment Print

If we consider the facts of the case under consideration, we notice from the admitted facts that the stage of impugned assessment is not an assessment made under section 147/148 of the Act after completion of block assessment but it is a case of original block assessment itself.

TPO cannot reject data provided by Assessee unless the same are inadequate

October 18, 2012 1388 Views 0 comment Print

A perusal of the above contents of the written submissions filed by the assessee before the TPO shows that the data was provided by the assessee before the TPO concerning the international transaction pertaining to availing of intra group services by the assessee from its associate enterprises.

If income is not chargeable to tax in India, tax is not required to be deducted u/s 195(1)

October 18, 2012 1375 Views 0 comment Print

In the case of Hyderabad Industries Ltd. (supra) also ITAT, Hyderabad Bench held the similar view. In the present case, the AO has failed to bring any material on record on the basis of which it could be concluded that commission paid to foreign agents is chargeable to tax in India. Unless the income is chargeable to tax in India, then tax is not required to be deducted u/s 195(1). From the facts and materials available on record, no definite conclusion can be made that the commission paid to foreign agents is chargeable to tax in India. Therefore, the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(i) is not sustainable. Hence, there is no reason to interfere with the finding of the CIT(A) on this issue. The grounds raised by the revenue are rejected.

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
August 2024
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031