Kachhi Heritage Vs ACIT (ITAT Pune) Grounds of Appeal 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Learned Assessing Officer erred in treating the status of the partnership firm as AOP for the reason that partnership deed is executed on an inadequate stamp paper. Your appellant submits that […]
It is not a case, where losses of non eligible unit or units are being set off against the profit of eligible unit. The issue whether section 10A is exemption provision deduction provision is of no relevance. Insofar as, carry forward of loss of unit eligible to deduction under section 10B is concerned the amendment made by the Finance Act, 2003 to subsection (6) with retrospective effect from 01.04.2001 specifically provide for carry forward of losses of 100% EOU.
Now the question is whether it should be reduced by the value as determined under section 50C of the act or actual money received by the assessee. The provisions of section 50C cannot be incorporated in the computation of block of the assets for the simple reason that it only substitutes the full value of the consideration received or accruing as a result of transfer for the purposes of section 48 only.
Delhi ITAT ruling: Assessment cannot be reopened merely on change of opinion. Long-term capital gain upheld. Depreciation disallowed. Full judgment.
In section 54 was transfer of a long term capital asset’ being the residential house referred to a residential house which might comprise more than one building or buildings structure; but the same were used as a single residential house. Thus, even if more than one unit were adjacent to each other and were being used as a single residential house by assessee and his family members, the same would be considered as residential house u/s 54 and entitled to exemption.
ACIT Vs Finolex Cables Limited (ITAT Pune) The solitary issue involved in the appeal of the Revenue for A.Y. 2012-13 relating to the assessee‟s claim for deduction u/s 80IC of the Act in respect of sale of scrap is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by various decisions of Tribunal rendered in assessee‟s own […]
DCIT Vs KBC NV (ITAT Mumbai) The issue involved in this ground of appeal i.e., data processing cost paid to head office is in the nature of royalty as per Clause-3, Explanation 1 to Section 9(1)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which is liable for withholding tax u/s.194J of the Income Tax Act, 1961 […]
ACIT Vs Mitsui & Co. Ltd. (ITAT Delhi) The facts in brief are that the assessee-company is incorporated in Japan and had a subsidiary in India, Mitsui India Pvt. Ltd. (MIPL). In India, assessee has undertaken several projects in connection with big natural installment and power projects during the relevant year through its project office. […]
Menarini india P.Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad) In the assessment proceedings, it was noticed by the AO that the assessee has claimed expenses of Rs.1,96,630/- and Rs.3,37,080/- against Tax Consultancy with Transaction Tax as “preparation of Amalgamation of MRPL with MIP” and “Lawyer fees for Merger” respectively as revenue expenses. The ld.AO sought details of […]
Foreign exchange fluctuation gain/loss should be treated as operating profit/loss in nature while computing the profit margin of the assessee as well as of the comparable companies.
