Nortonlifelock Inc. Vs ACIT (ITAT Pune) ITAT held that income earned by the assessee from sale of software, either directly to the customers in India or through distributors or resellers constitutes its business income and not the Royalty income and as such business income is not taxable in India as the assessee did not have […]
JCIT Vs United Spirits Limited (ITAT Bangalore) It is not in dispute that the shares of M/s. Lee Edges were purchased by the assessee in the Financial Year 2003-04 and those of M/s. Shaw Wallace Breveries Ltd., were purchased in the Financial Year 2001-02 were unlisted shares. These shares were sold in Financial Year 2004-05. […]
Carissa Investment (P) Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) In this case assessee-company has been able to prove that both the creditors have availability of sufficient funds to give loan to the assessee-company in assessment year under appeal. Merely because income was low declared by both the creditors, is no ground to make the impugned addition […]
Since section 44AD did not obligate assessee to maintain books, the provisions of section 68 could not be invoked where assessee had filed return of income under the provisions of section 44AD without maintaining books of account.
Shri Lakshmi Narayana Prasad Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore) In this case, the claim of assessee u/s. 54 was denied on the reason that assessee has not filed any supporting evidence to show the sale consideration was reinvested in new residential property. Before us, the ld. AR pointed out to the copies of bank statements and […]
State Bank of India Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) A plain reading of the section 10(5) read with rule 2B does not indicate any requirement of taking the shortest route for travelling to “any place in India” or putting any kind of restrictions the route to be adopted for going to such a destination. Quite to […]
Yeshoda Electricals Vs ACIT (ITAT Bangalore) This notice issued u/s. 148 is a manual notice and not a digital document. The digital document only does not require signature. A manual notice u/s. 148 is required to be dated and duly signed by the Officer who is issuing the same. A notice or an order without […]
Lam Research (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Bangalore) It was submitted that Working capital adjustment is made for the time value of money lost when credit time is given to the customers. The Assessee however does not bear any risk and has no working capital contingencies. The Assessee has not incurred any expenses for […]
Asian Paints Ltd Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) We have considered rival submissions in the light of decisions relied upon and perused material on record. Undisputedly, the assessee in its computation of income has computed disallowance under section 14A of the Act at Rs.23,98,769 by applying certain principles of apportionment. Therefore, it is not a case […]
P. Venkata Ramana Reddy Vs ACIT (ITAT Hyderabad) CBDT Circular mentions that the concerned assessees should be intimated that their cases fall either in ‘Limited Scrutiny’ or ‘Complete Scrutiny’ through notices issued u/s 143(2) of the Act and the procedure prescribed is that in Limited Scrutiny cases, the reasons/issues shall be forthwith (emphasis provided by […]
