ACIT Vs Mercedes-Benz India Pvt. Ltd (ITAT Pune) In the line of business of assessee i.e. manufacture and sale of passenger cars, the automobiles which were manufactured were governed by Central Motor Vehicles Act (CMV Act) and Central Motor Vehicle Rules (CMV Rules). Under the said regulations, it is mandatory to seek approval from the […]
Sagar Uttam Murhe Vs DCIT (ITAT Pune) Case law (2020) 120 com 187 CIT vs. Padmavati (Mad) (HC) holds that such an assessment could not exceed the scope of the prescribed ‘limited‘ scrutiny except as per the due process of law. This is indeed coupled with various coordinate benches decisions reiterating the very legal proposition. […]
Atlantic Bio Medical Pvt. Ltd Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) Assessee had undisputedly filed the return of income electronically but under bonafide belief that the Form 10CCB was to be filed manually with the AO as and when required thus failed to file the same electronically along with the return of income. No doubt ignorance of […]
ACIT Vs Indian Drugs & Pharmaceuticals Limited (ITAT Delhi) The penalty order reveals that the impugned penalty has been imposed by the Ld. AO for the solitary reason that the assessee made claim for deduction of expenses which were not allowable. The assessee furnished explanation for claiming higher deduction of expenses in the revised computation. […]
Interest on TDS is not interest paid on income tax per se and the disallowance thereof, is unwarranted and interest paid for delayed deposit of TDS cannot be equated to penalty or breach of law.
Kalyani Seetharaman Vs ACIT (ITAT Chennai) ITAT noted that the PCIT has not at all given a finding that the order of the AO i.e., the assessment order is erroneous or prejudicial to the interest of revenue and how. We have already noted the finding of PCIT in above para 4 and noted that simple […]
Shri Gopinathan Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai) It is not the case of the Department that the Assessing Officer has omitted to consider the claim of expenses and thereby passed the rectification order under section 154 of the Act. In this case assessment was reopened under section 147 of the Act and during the course of […]
AO further held that to write off a debt it necessary that the debt becomes bad and irrecoverable after making effort for recovery. In the case of the assessee, from the ledger copies furnished by it, it was found that amounts form the debtor were received regularly.
Disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) cannot be made if recipient has offered payment made by assessee as income in their hands. The Assessing Officer is directed to verify above facts and if it is found that payee has already offered above amount as income in their return of income, disallowance u/s.40(a)(ia) made by Assessing Officer would not survive.
ITAT Delhi held that cloud services merely facilitates the flow of user data from the front end user through internet to the provider’s system and back. Accordingly, subscription received towards cloud services is not royalty income.
