Ld. CIT(A) is required to apply her mind to all issues which arise from impugned order before her whether or not same had been raised by appellant before her; and further, that CIT(A) is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits.
Ranjana Aggarwal Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) When the original assessment is completed u/s 143(3) and the reassessment proceedings have been initiated after a period of 4 years from the end of the relevant assessment year and there is no allegation of any failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all […]
Versova Kokni Sunni Jamat Trust Vs Centralised Processing Centre (ITAT Mumbai) CIT(A), though admitted that assessee is not registered under section 12A of the Act and thus no benefit of exemption could be allowed to the assessee under section 11 of the Act, rejected the contention of the assessee that irrespective of status of registration […]
Once it is held that there is no error in the order of ld. AO, the ld. PCIT would be precluded from assuming revisionary jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act as one of the twin conditions mandated in section 263 is not satisfied.
It is apparent from bare reading of section 54F that the exemption becomes available towards capital gain arising from the transfer of any long term capital asset on purchasing or constructing one residential house in India. Thus, it is patent that in order to qualify for exemption u/s.54F, it is necessary that the new asset must be a ‘residential house’.
ACIT Vs Viacom 18 Media Pvt. Ltd (ITAT Mumbai) The issue in dispute in these both appeal is whether the transponder charges paid by the assessee to three entities listed above is in the nature of the ‘royalty’ and liable for withholding tax. In respect of the three above listed entities, the Tribunal (supra) has […]
ADM Agro Industries Latur & Vizag Pvt. Ltd Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) The grievance of the assessee is that impugned order passed by the A.O is illegal and barred by time. Section 154(7) of the Act prescribes the limitations for the passing order u/s 154 of the Act. For the sake of clarity, same is […]
Lahmeyer Holding GambH Vs DDIT (ITAT Delhi) Assessee on the basis of bonafide belief to the effect, as the Assessee do not have PE in India qua projects on the basis of which income has been earned, therefore offered its income for tax on presumptive basis u/s 44BBB of the Act which prescribe the tax […]
Land Acquisition Office Vs DCIT (TDS) (ITAT Delhi) The issue for consideration is whether the impugned interest received by the land owners on enhanced compensation is ‘income from other sources’ under section 56 of the Act attracting the TDS provision enshrined under section 194A of the Act. In the assessment proceedings for the assessment year […]
Addl. CIT Vs Lenskart Solution (P) Ltd. (ITAT Delhi) It was claimed by the Assessee that as the Assessee had made the payment to Facebook Ireland Inc. (FII), which admittedly did not have any permanent establishment (PE) in India and, therefore, the payments made to it for advertisement services were not chargeable to tax in […]
