Om Prakash Karnani Vs. ACIT (ITAT Jaipur) Undisputedly, the cash amounting to Rs. 5,34,000/- seized from the possession of Sh. Nand Lal Joshi and Sh. Nand Lal Pandya belongs to the assessee. The limited question therefore is source of such cash found and seized from the possession of these two persons which belongs to the […]
Disallowance u/s 14A got restricted to the extent of exempt income, even if the provisions of the section 14A were attracted.
Supermax Personal Care Private Ltd Vs. DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) The facts on record clearly reveal that in Assessment Year 2012-13 the assessee had purchased new plant and machinery on which additional depreciation @20% is allowable. However, since the plant and machinery were put to use for a period of less than 180 days in Assessment […]
Deloitte Haskins & Sells Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) Conclusion: Amount of tax deducted at source from the payment made to the recipient of such income could be said to be the amount of expenditure incurred by assessee and paid during the year and, therefore, it was allowable to assessee as business expenditure. Held: AO did […]
Rayban Sun Optics India Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) We are of the considered opinion that the ALP of an international transaction involving AMP expenses, the adjustment made by the TPO/DRP/AO is not sustainable in the eyes of law. At the same time, we cannot ignore the submission of the learned DR that the matter […]
Hindustan Coca-Cola Marketing Company Pvt. Ltd Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) We have carefully considered the facts of the case that the assessee stated that approximately 10000 cases were pulled back by the assessee from the market in view of the exceptional quality issues. The assessee submitted that the above quality issue is the pulled back […]
Add. CIT Vs Ircon International Ltd (ITAT Delhi) When we examine the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer in the instant case in the light of the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Madhukar Khosla (supra), it is evident that the Assessing Officer has merely perused the records available with […]
Assesse was under a bonafide belief that cash medical benefit were only reimbursement of the expenditure incurred by the employees, and as such they could not form part of their income, therefore, no tax could be recovered from the employer on account of short deduction of tax at source under section 192(1), if a bona fide estimate of salary taxable in the hands of the employee was made by the employer.
Lack of declaration in Form No.10 regarding specific purpose for which funds were being accumulated by the assessee trust would not be fatal to the exemption claimed u/s.11(2) of the Act.
Sumeru Enterprises Vs ITO (ITAT Jaipur) It is the case of the assessee that it had cancelled the allotment of certain flats in its commercial complex as the allottees/debtors refused to pay the outstanding amount towards the interest, complex maintenance charges and electric installation charges and the same were reversed and written off in respective […]
