I-Exceed Technology Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore) The provisions of Rule 11UA(2)(b) of the Rules provides that, the Assessee can adopt the fair market value as per the above two methods and the choice of method is that of the Assessee. The Tribunal has followed the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court rendered […]
Flutura Business Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore) We are of the view that, the Assessing Officer has erred in considering the actuals of revenue and profits declared in the future years as a basis to dispute the projections. At the time of valuing the shares as on 16.04.2012, the actual results of the […]
The issue under consideration is whether the capital gain deduction benefit is restricted to only one residential property under section 54F of the Income Tax Act?
Infosys Ltd. Vs The ACIT (ITAT Bangalore) The issue under consideration is whether the stay application seeking an extension of the stay approve by the Tribunal? In the present case, the assessee submitted that the appeal had been fixed for hearing on January 20, 2020, when the earlier stay order was passed. Thereafter, the case […]
DCIT Vs Bharath Fritz Werner Ltd. (ITAT Bangalore) At the time of hearing it was not disputed that the issue raised by the revenue in its appeals are already decided by a Special Bench of ITAT, Hyderabad. The issue regarding the applicability of provisions of section 206AA of the Act, in cases of tax to […]
ITAT held that AO can scrutinize the valuation report and he can determine a fresh valuation either by himself or by calling a determination from an independent valuer to confront the assessee but the basis has to be DCF method and he cannot change the method of valuation which has been opted by the assessee.
Shri B.A.Moideen Bava Vs DCIT (ITAT Bangalore) The issue raised by assessee is on merits is regarding peak credits in unaccounted bank accounts of assessee’s. It has been submitted that peak credit has to be computed on the basis of actual deposits and withdrawal and not on the basis of cash deposit alone. Accordingly, we […]
The issue under consideration is whether the AO is correct in levying penalty u/s 271C of the Act for non-deduction of tax at source on Leave Travel Allowance?
whether the assessee has to deduct tax at source at the rates prescribed in section 206AA in case the payees are unable to furnish their PANs, even if tax liability arises out of the treaty?
Dell International Services India Private Limited v. DCIT (ITAT Bangalore) Benefit of Section 10A of the Act is Allowed on Enhanced Income Pursuant to Mutual Agreement Procedure (MAP) Resolution Outcome: In favor of Assessee Facts: 1. During the relevant year, the assessee has provided ITeS and Software Development Services (SWD) of INR 629,43,81,078 and INR […]
