GVV Construction Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT (ITAT Cuttack) If the assessee uses motor lorries partly for own use and for hire charges he is not entitled to claim excess depreciation @ 30% as per the provisions of Section 32 of the Income Tax Act. Case Summary: – Facts of the case: The assessee filed return […]
The issue under consideration is whether order passed by the AO held that the draft order framed under Section 144C(1) of the Income Tax Act is in the name of a non-existent company is sustainable in law?
The issue under consideration is whether transfer pricing adjustment as notional interest and charging it to tax, disregarding the provisions of Article 11 of India Cyprus DTAA is justified in law?
The issue under consideration is whether the issue of notice u/s 153C instead of section 153A is considered as valid assessment or not?
ITAT states that, anyhow disallowing 10% of the expenditure on the ground that profit leakage has to be plugged cannot be supported. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, some disallowance of a random amount of 5 lakhs, in our view, would meet the end of justice. In the result, the balance disallowance is deleted and the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part.
If in relation to any assessment year, no incriminating material is found, no addition or disallowance can be made in relation to that assessment year in exercise of power under section 153A.
Lonsen Kiri Chemical Industries Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Ahmadabad) Once the comparable company becomes the AE of the assessee in the year under consideration, then such company cannot be considered for the purpose of comparable. Case Summary: – Facts of the case: The assessee is a joint venture of two companies namely Well Prospering Ltd […]
ACIT Vs Volvo Auto (India) Private Limited (ITAT Delhi) The issue under consideration is whether CIT(A)is correct in deleting the addition made on application of CUP method for determination of ALP of international transactions by the A.O.? ITAT states that, the AO’s observation that this expenditure has been debited to the profit and loss account […]
The issue under consideration is whether the penalty notice u/s 271(1)(c) issued to the assessee who has taxed his income as per provision of section 115JB pr 115JC is justified in law?
The issue under consideration is whether disallowance of relocation expenses u/s 40(a)(i) of the Act and non granting of tax deducted at source with respect to that expense is justified in law?
