Sponsored
    Follow Us:

All ITAT

No disallowance of sundry trade creditors if profit was determined on estimated basis

August 24, 2018 1527 Views 0 comment Print

M/s Aditya Enterprise Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata) In the instant case, the profit was determined on estimated basis due to the fact that assessee failed to produce books of account during the assessment. Once then profit has been determined on estimated basis then in our considered view no disallowance can be made on account of […]

No Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) if two legal interpretations were possible and Assessee acted in bonafide manner

August 24, 2018 2328 Views 0 comment Print

M/s Inspectorate Singapore Pte. Ltd.  Vs ADIT (ITAT Delhi) Assessee was under the belief that due to the ‘make available’ Clause in Article 12 (4) (b) of India Singapore DTAA, the consideration paid by the Indian customers to assessee cannot be regarded as ‘fees for technical services’ and further since there was no transfer of technology […]

No TDS required to be deducted U/s 194H on bank guarantee commission

August 24, 2018 1197 Views 0 comment Print

ITAT had held that there is no principal-agent relationship between the bank issuing the bank guaranee of the assessee. The ITAT Mumbai Bench had further noted that while it is termed as |guarantee commission|, the same is not in the nature of commission

Penalty u/s. 271E cannot be levied in case of bonafide belief

August 23, 2018 2853 Views 0 comment Print

Penalty u/s.271E was not leviable as the belief of assessee that return of advance from customers was not prohibited by section 269T was a bonafide belief.

MAT not payable on share income of member of AOP

August 23, 2018 2913 Views 0 comment Print

ACIT Vs M/s Om Metal Infraproject Ltd. (ITAT Jaipur) Clause (iic) inserted in Explanation 1 to section 115JB by the Finance Act, 2015 is remedial and curative in nature as it was brought in the statute to provide similar benefit to the member of the AOP which was earlier applicable to the partner of the […]

ITAT deletes Addition for Scrap on Last day of Financial Year not included in Stock

August 23, 2018 897 Views 0 comment Print

M/s Hero Moto Corp Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) As regards to Ground, relating to disallowance of cost of scrap material amounting to Rs.6.34 lacs, it can be seen that in the course of the business of manufacturing, the process generates some scrap on account of rejection of components, obsolescence of components, etc. In the […]

Transfer Pricing: Functionally different companies cannot be taken as comparable

August 23, 2018 957 Views 0 comment Print

M/s. Enchanting Travels Pvt. Ltd. Vs The Income Tax Officer (ITAT Bangalore) We find that TPO has already taken the total 10 comparables and with respect to 8 comparables, assessee has no objections. With respect to Kerala Travels Interserve Ltd., we have carefully perused its financial statements and we find the main revenue is from different […]

Software development and services cannot be compared with activity of making animated film

August 23, 2018 2799 Views 0 comment Print

It is seen that the company has completed full-length animated commercial film during the year under consideration. We note that no separate revenue and expenditure on this activity of making animated film is reported in the Annual Report. Since the activity of making animated film is functionally different from the activity of software development services and thus the segment of ‘software development and services’ of the company, cannot be compared with the functions of the assessee.

Capital Gain cannot be charged in absence of Transfer of Capital Assets

August 23, 2018 2928 Views 0 comment Print

Supermax Personal Care Private Limited Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) We are of the opinion that the endeavor of the departmental officers to tax the transaction in question as capital gains was not supported by the any legal base.First and foremost there was no transfer of capital asset,which is the basis for invoking the provisions of […]

No Penalty U/s. 271E on cash refund of advance from customers under Bonafide Belief

August 23, 2018 5613 Views 0 comment Print

 M/s. Orison Transport Vs DCIT (ITAT Cuttack) Belief of the assessee that return of advance from customers is not prohibited by section 269T was a bonafide belief. Therefore, the levy of penalty u/s.271E of the Act of Rs.21,49,943/- cannot be sustained. FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGMENT This is an appeal filed by the assessee against […]

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
August 2024
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031