Sole issue for determination is ‘whether amendment made by Finance Act, 2014 to Section 40(a)(ia) is to be applied retrospectively or not’.
CESTAT Bangalore held that amount taxed in the hands of partner u/s 28(v) needs to be allowed in the hands of the firm u/s 40(b) of the Income Tax Act.
Assessee filed ROI claiming relief u/s 90 but did not file Form No.67. Form was subsequently filed beyond the due date as per under Rule. CPC did not give credit for foreign tax.
ITAT Delhi held that the income earned on the job assigned at Indonesia cannot be considered to be global income of the assessee to be taxable in India.
ITAT Hyderabad held that payments made for making use of shrink wrap computer software wherein there is no transfer of any copyright nor grant of any commercial right to exploit it doesn’t fall within the definition of royalty and hence TDS not deductible.
ITAT Surat held that penalty under section 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act not leviable merely because the assesse couldn’t make compliance due to some bonafide reasons.
ITAT Delhi held that addition under section 69A of the Income Tax Act sustainable on failure to provide reasonable explanation of the sources and justification of heavy denomination cash gifts.
ITAT Mumbai held that addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act on the basis of mis-reporting of insurance company is unsustainable in law.
Generally, it is seen in the Tax Treaties and Model Tax Conventions that, the Article 5 Clause 7 provides for that an entity which is resident of contracting state who is controlled by another entity who is resident of other contracting state will not be considered as PE in other contracting state.
ITAT Cochin held that as assessee dutifully declared interest income of deceased wife’s deposit in his return, assessee is duly eligible to get credit of his deceased wife’s TDS.
