Explore the ITAT Bangalore case of Anand Sweets vs DCIT. Learn about the disallowance of employees’ contribution, legal arguments, and the victory for the assessee.
Dr. Chandrashekar Foundation Vs CIT (ITAT Bangalore) With regard to issue relating to repayment of loan, we modify the direction of the CIT (Exemptions) and direct the A.O. to examine this claim afresh i.e. if the cost of assets acquired out of loan funds have already been allowed as application of income, then the repayment […]
ITAT has taken the view that it is open to the parties in Transfer Pricing cases to take a stand contrary to their TP study, if they contend that the stand taken in the TP study is contrary to facts or was erroneous. Such a claim cannot be disregarded only on the basis that it is contrary to Assessee’s own stand in the TP study.
ACIT Vs e4e Business Solutions India Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Bangalore) TPO should choose the internal comparable in controlled transaction as against an external comparable The underlying object behind computing ALP of an international transaction is to find out the profits which such enterprise would have earned if the transaction had been with some third party […]
Penalty under section 271(1)(c) was not leviable as mere making of a claim which was not sustainable in law, by itself, would not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars regarding the income of assessee.
Giving advance to the employees as well as vendors were essential and wholly and exclusively linked to the business of the assessee. Since AO had not examined the claim of deduction u/s 37(1) r.w.s. 28, it was deemed appropriate to restore the issue to the files of AO for de novo consideration.
Navrathan Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. Vs ADIT (ITAT Bangalore) Explanatory memorandum to the Finance Act, 2021 proposing amendment in section 36(1)(va) as well as section 43B is applicable only from 01.04.2021. These provisions impose a liability on an assessee and therefore cannot be construed as applicable with retrospective effect unless the legislature specifically says so. In […]
Since excess amount paid over and above the net asset value on acquiring a business concern should constitute goodwill however, eligibility of assessee to claim depreciation on Goodwill to AO was restored after affording adequate opportunity of hearing.
It is settled position of law that disallowance cannot exceed the amount of dividend income earned during the relevant assessment year. Accordingly, the amount of disallowance u/s 14A of the IT Act needs to be restricted to the extent of exempted income earned during the relevant assessment year.
Held expenditure of reclamation and rehabilitation had to be allowed as a deduction under section 37(1) of the Act as expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively in connection with the business of the assessee.
