Explore the case of Zheng Yuan Mobiles Pvt. Ltd. vs DCIT at ITAT Delhi. Learn why improper vouchers led to disallowance and how it was overturned.
ITAT Delhi dismisses Revenue’s appeal, confirming that share premium from a holding company’s equity shares does not fall under Section 56(2)(viib) of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Delhi held that subscription, professional and training services rendered by the assessee do not fall within the definition of FTS under India-Netherland DTAA and, therefore, cannot be taxed in India.
ITAT Delhi held that “full value of consideration” or “cost of investment” cannot be substituted by the fair market value (FMV), except in the case falling within the purview of 50C and Sec. 56(l)(vi)/(vii) of the Income Tax Act.
Delve into ITAT Delhi’s verdict on ACIT vs Noida Cyber Park Pvt. Ltd., emphasizing the need for fair market value assessment in Section 40A(2)(a) disallowances and rejecting arbitrary ad hoc deductions.
ITAT Delhi deletes addition under section 69A of Income Tax Act in Viren Bakhru vs. ACIT case. Assessee’s explanation of cash deposit during demonetization accepted.
In the case of Shiv Kumar Nayyar vs. DCIT, the Delhi ITAT nullified an addition of cash investment, citing lack of proper application of mind in proceedings.
In the case of American Express Services India Ltd. Vs DCIT, Delhi ITAT remits the matter for correct market segment selection, following earlier order. Full text of the ITAT Delhi order included.
ITAT Delhi held that AO is not justified in adding unsecured loan received u/s. 68 as AO has rejected the evidences furnished by the appellant without establishing falsity of the documents. Further, documents duly proved identities and source of investors.
Read how the Delhi ITAT nullifies the reassessment of AEP Investments (Mauritius) Ltd. vs ACIT, citing lack of prima facie evidence of income escapement. Full order analysis.
