Maurice Patrick De Rebello Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore) The facts of the assessee’s case are similar to the case of Smt.K.G.Rukminiamma reported in 331 ITR 221 (Kar.) In the case of K.G.Rukminiamma (supra) the assessee on a site measuring 30′ x 110′ had a residential premises. Under a joint development agreement the assessee gave that […]
Rajyalakshmi Reguraj Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore) The A.O. had restricted the claim of exemption u/s 54F of the I.T.Act for the reason that the assessee had utilized only the sale consideration of Rs.1,75,83,000 out of the balance sale consideration of Rs.1,90,00,000 (Rs.2,40,00,000 – Rs.50,00,000) for the construction of a residential house. Accordingly, proportionately exemption u/s […]
FNF India Private Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Bangalore) The brief facts are that the AO denied deduction of gratuity paid. The assessee submitted before the CIT(Appeals) that it had created a provision for gratuity amounting to Rs.1,4769,903 and that Rs.44,22,139 was actually paid to the employees. In its return of income, the assessee had erroneously […]
The CIT(E) seems to have taken recourse to the provisions of section 12AA(4) of the Act which was inserted by the Finance Act of 2014 w.e.f. 01.10.2014. We find that those provisions are applicable only when the CIT(E) seeks to cancel the registration already granted to a trust. Those provisions cannot be made applicable for grant of registration u/s. 12AA of the Act.
ABB Global Industries and Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Bangalore) A perusal of the order of the AO shows that the AO called upon the assessee to justify the allowability of the losses on account of exchange loss on forward contracts. The assessee gave two submissions dated 8.1.2014 and 23.1.2014, copies of which are […]
Joseph K. Zachariah Vs ACIT (ITAT Bangalore) Section 54(2) of the Act has two conditions for availing deduction u/s 54(1) of the Act. Firstly, the assessee has to utilize the capital gain in purchase of new property before the due date of furnishing the return of income u/s 139 of the Act, which encompasses sub-section […]
Bangalore Turf Club Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Banglore) Assessing Officer argued that the Finance Act, 2001 has inserted the words ‘card game or other game of any sort’ in Section 194B of the Act which will even cover the “stake money” which is otherwise not covered by Section 194BB of the Act. We find that […]
JCIT (LTU) Vs M/s. Texas Instruments (India) Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Bangalore) As per the submissions made by Ld A.R, we notice that the disallowance of Rs.5.54 crores made by the AO forms part of Provision for expenses amount of Rs.9.71 crores created on 31.3.2006 relevant to AY 2006-07. It was submitted that the above said […]
M/s. Innaccel Technologies Private Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Bangalore) The A.O. was of the view that the shares of the company have been over valued and accordingly asked the assessee to justify the valuation. After considering the explanations of the assessee, the A.O. took the view that the valuation report has been prepared on the […]
DCIT Vs Coffeeday Enterprises Ltd (ITAT Bangalore) In terms of section 195, the liability to withhold taxes arrears at the time of payment/credit of any interest (or any other sum) which is chargeable under the provisions of the Act. The payment/credit was not made till 31.03.2010 and also in terms of the Agreement, interest was […]
