Infosys Limited Vs DCIT (ITAT Bangalore) Conclusion: The applicable rate of TDS on subcontracting charges paid to Infosys China should be considered at 10% as per the India-China DTAA instead of 20% as per section 206AA. Held: Assessee was an Indian company, engaged in the business of development and export of computer software and related […]
It is clear that the income generated out of earlier release of State Government for its project would have to be converted into State’s equity towards the project and the same cannot be counted as income of BMRCL. Thus, there is no profit motive as the entire fund entrusted and the interest accrued therefrom has to be utilized only for the purpose of scheme. Thus, it has to be capitalized and cannot be considered as revenue receipts.
G.N. Venugopal Vs ACIT (ITAT Bangalore) Conclusion: Merely because of the fact that the land was sold for profit, it could not be held that income arising from the sale of land was taxable as profit arising from the adventure in the nature of trade. Where land was not subjected to any conversion as non-agricultural […]
The passport to derive benefit under sec. 54F(1) is investment in construction of property within the period required u/s 54(1)F or to invest in residential property within the stipulated time for enabling deduction under section 54F of the Act.
ALP of corporate guarantee has to be determined as it falls within scope and ambit of an international transaction after retrospective amendment to section 92B and 0.5% corporate guarantee is held to be appropriate.
Infosys Limited Vs DCIT (ITAT Bangalore) The relevant ground with regard to the above issue are grounds 9.1 to 9.3. The Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Nagarjuna Fertilizders and Chemicals Ltd. v. ACIT reported in (2017) 78 taxmann.com 264 had held if rate of tax applicable under DTAA is lower than […]
Sri Suhas Suresh Shet Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore) In the matter of condonation of delay in filing appeals beyond the limitation period, the courts are empowered to condone the delay, provided the litigant is able to demonstrate that there was ‘sufficient cause’ in preferring appeal beyond the limitation period. The Courts have also held that […]
If the assessee actually received service Tax from its customers and kept it without depositing the same within due date of filing of return of income u/s.139(1) of the Act, then only the AO has to invoke the provisions of Section 43B and bring that amount to tax.
Tokai Rika Minda India Private Limited Vs DCIT (ITAT Bangalore) On the issue of Transfer Pricing (TP) adjustment to be restricted to AE transactions, we find that the Assessee has rightly contended that section 92 of the Act can be applied only in respect of international transactions i.e., transactions with AE. The ITAT in the […]
Bangalore Electricity Supply Company Ltd Vs DCIT (ITAT Bangalore) This appeal came up for hearing before this Tribunal on 8.3.2022 and it was pointed out to the ld. AR for the assessee that the appeal was not signed by the competent authority and it was signed by General Manager (CT&GST), BESCOM. It was pointed out […]
