Sh. Vijay Chaudhary Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) Whether the assessee invests the entire sales consideration in construction of a residential house within three years from the date of transfer can he be denied exemption under Section 54F on the ground that he did not deposit the said amount in capital gains account scheme before the […]
Pure Software Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) t is pertinent to note here that in case of the assessee company, two non-resident foreign companies, one by the name of J2S INC, USA and another by the name of NAVOS, Belgium were appointed to locate foreign buyers to whom the assessee company could sale its […]
MakeMy Trip (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) As regards the penalty based on addition on account of difference in rate of depreciation on computer peripherals, the Assessing Officer has observed that the assessee made a wrong claim of depreciation @ 60% on printers, UPS, computer stationery, routers and scanners by clubbing them with […]
Bright line test is not an appropriate yardstick for determining existence of an international transaction for calculating arms length price.
Enhancement u/s 251 (1) (a) is prohibited on the issues which have not at all been considered by AO during assessment proceedings, therefore, CIT (A) had exceeded his jurisdiction in enhancing the income of assessee by considering the new sources of income not at all considered by AO.
Smt. Vatsala Asthana Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) Regarding the payment made by the assessee before 31/03/2014, Hon7ble High Court of Rajasthan in the case of Shankar Lal Saini (supra) held that, where assessee, an individual deposited unutilized sale consideration in capital gains scheme within the due date of filing of belated tax return under section […]
Any expenditure incurred for obtaining loan was allowable as revenue expenditure even if the loan was intended for acquiring a capital asset. Thus, upfront fee paid to bank was thus allowable.
Since the title in goods passed from foreign suppliers to assessee outside India at the port of shipment and AO failed to show as to how income of foreign parties was chargeable to tax in India, therefore, no income had accrued to foreign parties in India in terms of section 5 and section 9, therefore, section 195 did not apply to payments.
Since the booking of bare shell of a flat was a construction of house property and not purchase, therefore, the date of completion of construction was to be looked into which was as per provision of section 54, therefore, AO was directed to allow benefit to assessee as claimed u/s.54.
Swati Luthra Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) Conclusion: Assessee had entered into genuine transaction of sale and purchase of shares and therefore, satisfied the conditions of Section 10(38) as no law prohibits purchase of shares in cash and it was the option of the buyer of shares to keep the shares either in Demat form or […]
