It was held by ITAT delhi in the case of SC Jhonson Products Private Limited Vs. DCIT, that framing of assessment against a non existing entity/person is not a procedural irregularity but a jurisdictional defect and can not be cured by application of Section 292B of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
In the present case services were provided by the non-resident individuals so article 15 was applicable but the pre-requisite condition that the each non-resident individual had to be present in India for more than 90 days which was not ascertained.
ITAT Delhi has held in the case of Perfect Paradise Emporium Pvt. Ltd vs. ITO that If creditors are found bogus then the amount can be added back to income u/s 68 as unexplained cash credits or us 41(1) as business income.
Claim cannot be denied if sufficient documents are in hand of AO even though the party does not reply to notice issued u/s 133(6); (even though the party confirmation is not available against notice issued u/s 133(6)).
In the case of HCL Technologies BPO Services Ltd vs. ACIT, ITAT has held that for transfer pricing only amount retained by associates from end user is to be taken into account for transfer pricing adjustment, and to adjust operating cost by excluding abnormal cost incurred on a/c of Startup Company like salary, rent, and depreciation.
In the cited case, ITAT inter-alia held that since the payments have been made as reimbursement of expenses to the agents of the appellant, therefore, appellant was not obliged to deduct TDS under section 194C of the Act and as such, no disallowance is warranted u/s 40(a)(ia) of the IT Act.
ITAT held that (i) International recruitment service operations conducted from STPI, Noida are held to be eligible for benefit of deduction u/s 10A. (ii) The deduction of payment of employees’ contribution towards provident fund and ESI cannot be disallowed under section 43B
CBDT Instruction No. 5/2014 dated 10.07.2014 on subject of monetary limit for filing appeals is applicable on pending cases also- ACIT Vs. Suncity Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT DELHI)
No effort or any arguments have been advanced by the Revenue to justify that the expenses were unreasonable and excessive. In the absence of any justification for making a 5% disallowance of the total expenses for royalty
The ITAT Delhi in the case of Seagram Distilleries Pvt. Ltd concluded that the provision for losses in the ordinary course of business can be allowed if the provisions are made on scientific basis. Thus, the provision in respect of breakage losses is allowable as the same have been measured scientifically taking into account the past business experience.
