ITAT Rajkot held that apparent and obvious mistakes in the return can be rectified by filing an application under section 154 of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, rejection of such application is unjustified.
ITAT Hyderabad held that notices issued under section 200A of the Act for computation and intimation for payment of late filing fees under section 234E of the Act relating to the period of tax deduction prior to 01/06/2015 are not maintainable.
ITAT Cochin held that freezer deposits is taxable only on the year of termination of the agreement between the assessee (supplier) and the dealer/ distributor.
ITAT Cochin held that levy of late fee under section 234E for processing for period prior to 1st June 2015 is unsustainable and bad-in-law.
ITAT Chennai held that even though assessee has not invested sale proceeds in Capital Gain Account Scheme, but complied with the conditions u/s. 54F(1) of the Act by purchasing an independent house. Deduction u/s 54F allowed as provisions of section 54F are beneficial provisions and are to be considered liberally.
ITAT Delhi held that when the transaction between the assessee and its Indian AE is found to be at arm’s length, no further attribution of profit can be made to the dependent agent PE in India.
ITAT Delhi held that amount received not being in the nature of royalty under Article 12(3) of the treaty cannot be brought to tax in India in absence of a Permanent Establishment.
ITAT Mumbai held that Section 10AA does not prescribe any time limit for realization of export proceeds. Hence, the benefit of Section 10AA of the Income Tax Act cannot be denied merely because the export proceeds were realized after the expiry of 6 months from the end of relevant previous year in which export sales were made.
ITAT Delhi held that rent is subjected to TDS @ 10% under section 194-I of the Income Tax Act, whereas, Common Area Maintenance (CAM) charges are subjected to TDS @ 2% under section 194C of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Mumbai held that initiation of penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act without informing the charges framed for initiation of the same via statutory notice renders the entire proceeding inacceptable.
