5. Chapter-XVI of the Income-tax Act provides for special provisions applicable to firms. Section 184 provides that a firm shall be assessed as a firm for the purposes of this Act if the partnership is evidenced by an instrument and the individual shares of the partners are specified in that instrument. It is also necessary to be assessed as a firm as per sub-section (2) that the certified copy of the instrument of partnership
Service charges (assessee’s appeal) (i) whether the services rendered benefited group companies. (ii) whether the expenses were incurred to take care of the TCCC brand image. (iii) whether rendering services to the bottlers could be a ground for making disallowance.
8. As seen in section 80P(2)(b), the deduction in respect of income of co-operative societies has been dealt in under different parts. In respect of the sums referred in clause (a) of sub-section (2), the assessee needs to be a co-operative society engaged in various activities specified therein. In the case of sums referred to in clauses(c) and (d) of sub-section (2), again it is sufficient that the assessees be co-operative societies
5. Even if this appeal is viewed with angle of section 15 of the Act, which speaks about chargeability of salary. Section 15 of the Act is reproduced- herewith:- “The following income shall be chargeable to income tax under the head “Salaries”- a). any salary due from an employer or a former employer to an assessee in the previous year, whether paid or not;
4. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and also perused the material available on record. The claim of the assessee is that construction of the dwelling units and leasing out the same to sister concerns amounts to exploiting of a commercial asst. In fact, the sister concerns which took the property on lease utilized the same for their business of producing films by exploiting the same
Nandlal M. Gandhi Vs. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai)- In this appeal, the assessee has challenged the order of Block Assessment passed by the Assessing Officer by contending that the impugned order was barred by the period of limitation prescribed under section 158BE of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and therefore, the said order was bad in law.
7. In the facts of the present case we find that the assessee undertook work on contract basis. The assessee took contract work of insitu cement lining for water supply project of the Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board (Gujarat Government Undertaking). 8. Vide Finance Act, 2007 an Explanation was inserted with retrospective effect from 1-4-2000 after sub-section (13) of section 80IA, which reads as under:
20. On examination of the license agreement and schedule attached with the same, we find that entire factory building along with plant & machinery have been given under the agreement by M/s. Ramco Ind. Ltd. to the assessee for taking over the production facilities. The agreement as a whole has to be considered. As per the agreement between licensee and licensor
The CIT (A) in a well-reasoned and well-discussed order has not committed any error in coming to a conclusion that the assessee was entitled to claim deduction on account of foreign exchange fluctuation loss. (Para 15)
“In our view, the High Court was right in holding that the assessee was carrying on an adventure or concern in the nature of trade. The assessee not only constructed vaults of special design and special doors and electric fitting, but it also rendered other services to the vault-holders. It installed fire alarm and was incurring expenditure for the maintenance of fire alarm by paying charges to the municipality
