Order of the PCIT cancelling the registration since inception, u/s 12AA(3) was legally not valid as no material was being referred by PCIT and its applicability to any of the provisions of Section 2(15) and/or Section 12AA(3) while revoking the registration.
Himalaya Drug Company Vs ACIT (ITAT Bangalore) We noticed that the assessee has exported finished goods to its AEs located in various Countries and the AEs have only marketed the goods. Since the finished goods exported by the assessee are drugs and beauty care items, the assessee was required to comply with the requirement of […]
Canvera Digital Technologies Pvt. Ltd Vs DCIT (ITAT Bangalore) From the details filed, Ld.AO observed that, assessee had computed the value as per DCF method and that there was nothing to suggest that DCF method was an appropriate method to value the shares. Ld.AO rejected DCF method adopted by assessee for the reasons that cash […]
Dell International Services India Pvt. Ltd. Vs JCIT (ITAT Bangalore) We find that before us, there are 3 grievances of the assessee. The first grievance is regarding assessee’s request for exclusion of comparable M/s. Comp-U-Learned Tech India Ltd. The second grievance is regarding assessee’s request for exclusion of CAT Technology Ltd. The third grievance of […]
Jalarani Jagruti Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) It is not in dispute that receipts in question have direct nexus with the business of the assessee and represent cash receipts against sale of shops and flats. is also not in dispute that the assessee follows project completion method of revenue recognition and that project […]
ITO Vs Newtech (India) Developers (ITAT Mumbai) What was to be received by the assessee was from a joint venture, in which assessee itself was a participant, but, under the said arrangement, it was to be entirely funded by Shivalik Ventures Pvt Ltd. The essence of the arrangement was the performance of obligations by the […]
The issue under consideration is whether the issuing notice u/s 153C to the person other than person against whom search is initiated, but without submitting satisfaction note is justified in law?
DCIT Vs Edelweiss Tokio Life Insurance Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai) During assessment proceedings, it transpired that the assessee earned dividend income of Rs.17.92 Lacs and claimed the same to be exempt u/s.10(34). However, the Ld. Assessing Officer opined that since the income in case of insurance business was to be computed in terms of provisions of […]
The issue under consideration is whether the deduction claimed u/s 80HH, 80I and 80IA for production, processing, transmission and distribution of various gases is justified in law?
The issue under consideration is whether the CIT(A) is correct in confirming an addition of by treating sale of land as business income against the appellant’s claim as “Long Term Capital Gain”?
