ITO v. Raj Tools Centre PAP (ITAT Mumbai) Appeals is against addition of ₹.2,60,603/-, as unexplained expenditure u/s 69C of the Act. As per the investigations carried out by the Sales Tax Authorities, the aforementioned parties were found to be involved in giving accommodation entries only without actually supplying the goods. The logical inference is […]
Since distributor of the products did not have any right to change the content hence, the revenue derived on account of distribution of the products was business income and under no circumstance, could be held to be royalty. Assessee had already offered income as business income in terms of the MAP, therefore, the income as declared by assessee in accordance with the MAP and accepted by the Department in the earlier years had to be accepted.
MUFG Bank Ltd. Vs ACIT (International Taxation) (ITAT Delhi) With respect to the addition on account of the interest received by Indian branches from head office and other overseas branches amounting to ₹ 3,499,476/–. During the year , assessee has received an interest of ₹ 3,499,476 from its head office and overseas branches. The assessee […]
Smt. Monika Jain Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) The issue under consideration is whether the additional claim (section 54 exemption Claim) will be allowed to be presented in front of appellate authorities? ITAT states that, the Assessing Officer has been barred from accepting any new claims, but no such bar has been imposed on the appellate […]
Jhonson Electric Company Limited Vs ITO (ITAT Surat) Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in CIT Vs Ved Prakash & sons (HUF) (supra) held from the bare reading of section 2(42A), the word ‘owner’ has by design not been used by the Legislature. The word ‘held’ as per dictionary meaning means to possess, be the […]
Income received on providing bandwidth services outside India was not taxable as ‘Royalty’ under India-Singapore Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) as mere receipt of service using equipment under the control, possession and operation of service provider would only be considered as transaction of a service and not to ‘use or right to use’ an equipment, and would not attract ‘Royalty’ under the Act or the Tax Treaty.
Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Board Vs DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad) The AO during the assessment proceedings has made the disallowance of Rs.50.85 crores in determining the income under normal computation of income under the provisions of Section 14A read with Rule 8D of Income Tax Rule. The AO made the addition of the same disallowance while […]
Ajit Singh Melhotra Vs ACIT (ITAT Indore) We find that the addition was made on the basis of admission of assessee’s son during the course of search. It was contended before us, that all these documents were properly recorded in the regular books of accounts of the persons to which these documents actually pertained. However, […]
The issue under consideration is whether the addition of ‘Mark to market’ Loss made by AO on account of disallowance of loss on foreign exchange forward contract loss is justified in law?
The issue under consideration is whether the assessee is correct in stating that cognizance taken under section 153A of the Act is illegal at the end of the A.O.?
