ITAT Delhi held that profit sharing as provided in MOU cannot be treated as deemed dividend and accordingly outside the purview of section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act.
It was an undisputed fact that investment made by the taxpayer in shares of its overseas subsidiary was made in Euro and redemption of such shares were also made in Euro. Thus, actual profit or loss on sale / redemption of such shares were to be computed in Euro only and thereafter, converted to INR for the purposes of Section 45 of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Delhi held that once the expenditure is allowable as business expenditure u/s 30 to 38 of the Income Tax Act there is no requirement of generation of income for claiming business expenditure.
ITAT Delhi held that consideration for permitting the licensee the right to use of brand name or trademark has to be treated as Royalty in terms of section 9(1)(vi) of the Act read with Article 12 of the tax treaty. Accordingly, the same will be taxable.
During the appellate proceedings, the assessee has submitted that it has taken loan for purchase of two residential properties which have been allotted to two Directors for their residential purposes. It was submitted that the perquisite value on account of residence has been accounted for in the income of the Directors and has been offered for taxation.
It is the case of the assessee that the rent payment to the licensor is independent of the CAM charges payable and thus the CAM charges cannot partake the character of rent. The assessee thus contends that the deduction rate applicable on CAM charges @2% under Section 194C has been rightly deducted.
There is no evidence of any construction activity or of the fact that assessee has invested the proceeds in statutory deposits and then spent any proceeds of the sales consideration of two properties he had sold, into the construction over this plot. Thus the property in which part investments of capital gains was done continued to be plot for all purposes and intent, for the assessee in the period when construction was to atleast to be started, if not completed.
ITAT Delhi held that addition under section 69A of the Income Tax Act merely on the basis of agreement which is not even signed without any corroborative material is unsustainable in law.
ITAT Delhi held that as payment of rent and common area maintenance charges is made to distinct entities/ companies, TDS @10% u/s 194-I is deductible in case of payment of rent and TDS @2% u/s 194C is deductible in case of payment of Common Area Maintenance charges.
Bokaro Power Supply Co. Pvt Vs Addl. CIT Special Range(ITAT Delhi) In the written submissions the assessee has agitated regarding charging of interest of Rs. 48,069/- u/s. 234 A of the Act and submitted that the company has electronically uploaded form 3CEB on 30th November 2015 as well as the Income Tax Return on same […]
