ITAT Bangalore

Interest on home Loan availed of to repay earlier loan is allowable U/s. 24(b)

Akulu Nagaraj Gupta Subbaraju Vs. ITO (ITAT Bangalore)

If second borrowing has really been used to repay the original loan and this fact is proved to the satisfaction of AO, interest paid on the second loan would also be allowed as deduction under section 24....

Read More

Provision for warranty made on scientific way and based on past history is allowed as deduction

Dell International Services India Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT (ITAT Bangalore)

Provisions for expenditures have to be made in the reasonable way otherwise the same may be disallowed while computing the income and tax thereon of an assessee...

Read More

Deduction U/s. 54F cannot be denied for Non-completion of construction of new residential house within specified period of three years

Babitha Kemparaje Urs Vs. CIT (ITAT Bangalore)

Once assessee had invested sale proceeds of existing asset for the purpose of construction of new house within the time period specified under section 54F he could not be denied the benefit under the section, even if the assessee finally could not construct the new house within the specified period of three years....

Read More

Expense on Earning Income from Other Sources only is Allowable u/s 57(iii)

Monarch Commodities Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (ITAT Bangalore)

Monarch Commodities Pvt. Ltd. Vs.  DCIT (ITAT Bangalore)  Under section 57(iii) of the Act, only those expenditure are to be allowed which are related to earning of income from other sources. Since the expenditure claimed by the assessee was not incurred to earn income from other sources, the same cannot be allowed. FULL TEXT OF [&helli...

Read More

Interest paid to MSME for delayed payment is not allowable

Dy. CIT (LTU) Vs. Bosch Ltd. (ITAT Bangalore)

Dy. CIT (LTU) Vs. Bosch Ltd. (ITAT Bangalore) Section 23 of MSMED Act has specifically provided that the interest paid to the Micro, Small & Medium Enterprises on account of delayed payment is not allowable as deduction from income. Section 23 of MSMED Act has specifically prohibited the assessee from claiming the deduction from the [...

Read More

TDS on accumulated RPF balance post cessation of Employment till withdrawal?

ACIT vs. Shri Dilip Ranjrekar (ITAT Bangalore)

In the wake of the decision of the Bengaluru ITAT, in the case of “The ACIT, Circle-1(2)(1) Bengaluru vs. Shri Dilip Ranjrekar, in ITA No. 858/Bang/2016, dated 10.11.2017, an intriguing question has arisen, as to whether TDS is required to be deducted by the employer company, in the case of an erstwhile employee, who has otherwise rende...

Read More

Payment for Acquiring Mining Rights is Capital Expenditure

Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Shri K.R.Kaviraj (ITAT Bangalore)

ACIT Vs. Shri K.R. Kaviraj (ITAT Bangalore) In the light of the judgment of the Honorable Supreme Court in the case of Aditya Minerals Pvt. Ltd. (239 ITR 817) the impugned payment made for acquiring mining rights is capital expenditure and cannot be allowed as revenue expenditure. The reliance placed by the ld.CIT(A) on the […]...

Read More

Amount W/off not allowable for which suit been filed till disposal of such suit

Health and Glow Retailing Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (ITAT Bangalore)

Health and Glow Retailing Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT (ITAT Bangalore) Assessee has taken premise on rent for which he has given interest-free refundable security deposit of Rs. 11,70,000 to the landlord. When the assessee could not continue with the possession, he claimed the entire amount back which was not given by the landlord, therefore he [&...

Read More

Omission of SDT by Finance Act 2017, renders it non-existent from inception: ITAT Bangalore

Texport Overseas Private Limited vs. DCIT (ITAT Bangalore)

Whether the omission of reference of section 40A(2)(b) from section 92BA by virtue of the amendment of Finance Act, 2017 w.e.f. 01.04.2017 shall be deemed not to be on the statute since its introduction w.e.f. 01.04.2012?...

Read More

Addition U/s. 69 justified for Excess gold recovered from employees

Fusion-Jewels of South Vs. Dy. CIT & Ors. (ITAT Bangalore)

Where assessee did not explain satisfactorily about excess gold found from his employee’s possession, addition made under section 69 was as such, rightly made....

Read More
Page 1 of 2412345...1020...Last »

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (3,651)
Company Law (3,706)
Custom Duty (6,858)
DGFT (3,607)
Excise Duty (4,105)
Fema / RBI (3,406)
Finance (3,623)
Income Tax (26,750)
SEBI (2,837)
Service Tax (3,328)