The Hon’ble ITAT, New Delhi in DCIT v. Planman HR Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No.5152/Del/2017, dated July 15, 2021) disposed of the appeal filed by the Revenue Department (Respondent) and upheld the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT Appeals), deleting the disallowance of INR 54,31,041/- being interest on late payment of service […]
M/s. Vijaya Bank Employees Housing Co-operative Society Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Bangalore) Conclusion: In present facts of the case it was observed by the Hon’ble Bench that where a deduction is necessary in order to ascertain the profits and gains, such deductions should be allowed. Profits should be computed after deducting the expenses incurred for […]
Addl. CIT Vs Gillette Diversified Operations Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Delhi) Section 32 requires that the assessee must use the asset for the ‘purposes of business’. It does not mandate usage of the asset by the assessee itself. As long as the asset is utilized for the purpose of business of the assessee, the requirement of […]
No addition could be made under section 69B because the two pieces of evidence relied on by Revenue Authorities viz., the data retrieved from the Pen-drive and the admission by the vendors of the property though might have a persuasive value but would not have much substantive evidentiary value in order to make additions in the hands of the assessee.
Navodaya Education Trust Vs DCIT (ITAT Bangalore) it is submitted that the CPC, Bengaluru made the impugned adjustment in its intimation u/s 143(1), erroneously and as such the same was rectifiable as per the provisions of section 154. The CIT(Appeals) has erred in confirming the the same and rejecting the rectification application filed by the […]
Carraro India Private Limited Vs DCIT (ITAT Pune) It is seen that the assessee paid commission of Rs.58.65 lakh to overseas agents for export orders obtained by them in overseas territories. Section 195 mandates the deduction of tax at source from any sum paid by the assessee which is ‘chargeable under the provisions of this […]
Addition made on account of under-invoicing of sales to sister concern was not justified unless and until export sales to sister concern were sham transaction.
ACIT Vs M/s Sur Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Delhi) LANDMARK ORDER – Bhushan group companies get big relief by ITAT DELHI – First Of This Kind Where Addition under section 68 Quashed on Sole Ground of Violation of Natural Justice. – No Second Innings Given. Addition under section 68 deleted of Rs.36.50 Crore in three […]
DCIT Vs Hurkisondas Nurrotumdas Hospital & Research Centre (ITAT Mumbai) Going by the factual matrix as enumerated in the preceding paragraphs, it could be noted that the terms of arrangement with consultant Doctors was different from employee-doctors. The consultant doctors were paid based on the services rendered by them and on the basis of doctors’ […]
Smt. Anita Sunil Mahajan Vs ACIT (ITAT Pune) Definition of ‘relative’ for Specified Domestic Transactions (SDTs) should be as per Section 2(41) of Income Tax Act, 1961 and Section 56(2)(v) would not apply. Case Summary: – Facts of the case: During AY 2013-14, Smt. Anita Sunil Mahajan (Assessee), filed her return declaring total income at […]
