Merely because an assessee makes an extraordinary profit, it would not lead to the conclusion that same was organized/arranged for that the onus remains undischarged by AO, except for presence of suspicious circumstances, as such adjustments made by the AO scaling down the deduction under section 10AA, was, therefore, without sanction of law.
Assessee filed details of statement showing provision for mark to market loss and also submitted a detailed note on mark to market loss on outstanding position. Assessee submitted that it had made provisions for loss following accepted accounting principles as per the Guidance Note on ‘Accounting for Equity Index & Equity Stock Futures and Options’ issued by ICAI and claimed the loss as deductable business expenditure.
The issue under consideration is whether depreciation on ‘imported software’ will be considered as royalty and liable for disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) for want of TDS?
M/s. Karanja Terminal & Logistics Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) Interest income received by the assessee from the FDRs/ICDs made out of funds are inextricably linked to the development of port terminal and other infrastructure at Karanja Creek which is yet to be completed and commissioned. We would like to add that the these […]
Addition on account of undisclosed stock/ production is not justified where no physical discrepancy was found/detected by the survey team and excess value of stock was merely because of difference in valuation of closing stock
Transfer Pricing: ITAT held that even if an assessee is eligible for tax exemption at the rate of hundred percent under section 10A/10B of the Act, then also the arm’s length price on international transactions deserve to be determined under section 92C of the Act.
person working in software industry cannot be termed as ‘Wages’. In our view there is no distinction sought to be made in the provisions of Sec.80JJAA of the Act
Naveen Kumar Kaparthy Vs ITO (ITAT Hyderabad) In the instant case, when the books of account are not maintained, the AO did not initiate any proceedings for not maintaining the books of account. The AO obviously satisfied that the books of account were not maintained for good and sufficient reasons. When the AO accepted the […]
Even though amendment was given a retrospective effect but by that time assessee had already done the transactions without complying section 194J for payment made towards data line charges, therefore, assessee could not be held to have violated the provisions of section 194J, because the law cannot possibly compel a person to do something which is impossible to perform.
As AO has not unearthed any incriminating during the course of search operation under section 132, so no addition could be made during the relevant assessment year under section 153A by reopening the assessment on the matter, which was already examined earlier during original asses
