ITAT held that no tax is required to be deducted at source on amount reimbursed to the director of the company. Further, when tax has been deducted at source by the assessee while receiving software consultancy services, disallowance cannot be done by the Revenue Department.
Rupesh Vyas Vs ACIT (ITAT Indore) Feeling aggrieved by appeal-order dated 20.09.2018 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-1, Indore [“Ld. CIT(A)”], which in turn arises out of assessment-order dated 15.12.2016 passed by the learned ACIT-3(1), Indore [“Ld. AO”] u/s 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [the Act] for Assessment-Year 2014-15, the assessee has filed […]
ITAT Mumbai held that payments made under Sales or Return agreements not covered under section 194C of the Income Tax Act. Hence, TDS not deductible.
ITAT Delhi held that a reasonable amount of expenditure towards distribution of gifts amongst the dealers is allowable expenditure.
ITAT Pune held that addition of unexplained cash credit sustained as mere filing of documentary evidence doesnt absolve proving of genuineness and creditworthiness of the unsecured loans.
ITAT Bangalore held that deduction under section 10A/ 10B of the Income Tax Act allowable as the assessee has obtained post facto approval from RBI coupled with the fact that it has also realized the said amounts.
ITAT Mumbai held that income of non-resident not taxable in India merely because the status of the assessee was wrongly mentioned as resident in the original return of income.
ITAT Dehradun held that Uttarakhand Environment Protection and Pollution Control Board (UEPPCB) is a corporation which has been constituted under a Central Act, no tax was deductible. Accordingly, penalty u/s 271C of the Income Tax Act cannot be levied on a non-taxable entity.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that addition u/s 69 of the Income Tax Act as unexplained investment unsustainable as the investment is out of the NRI Repatriation funds came outside India and which is not taxable in India.
ITAT Bangalore held that addition under section 69B of the Income Tax Act for unexplained investment solely on the basis of the document that didn’t contained name of the assessee is unsustainable as the same is outside the purview of definition of section 153C(1)(a) & (b).
