Midland Credit Management India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Addl. CIT (ITAT Delhi) Assessee by way of additional ground has claimed deduction of cess on the ground that the same is not covered under section 40(a)(ii) of the Act. The Hon’ble High Court of Bombay at Panaji bench in the case of Sesa Goa 423 ITR 426 […]
ACB [India] Power Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) Assessing Officer observed that the borrowings of the assessee also has been invested in share capital of subsidiary companies and even the funds raised during the year under consideration have been invested in subsidiary shares of group companies and also repaying the loans. The Assessing Officer was […]
Haier Appliances India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT (ITAT Delhi) This is not disputed by the Revenue as the TPO in order dated 21.10.2011 considered Vivek Limited as appropriate comparable for benchmarking AMP expenses, applying Bright Line Test. The TPO considered Vivek Limited as comparable as it is trader/re-seller of home appliances and does not own […]
Settlement received from the Government of India was not coming under the purview of the business income as there was no business during the period and income which had not accrued to assessee could not be termed as business income.
DCIT Vs Ebony Retail Holdings Ltd. (Delhi ITAT) It is not in dispute that assessee has given security deposit for taking the premises on lease. Learned Counsel for the Assessee referred to various replies filed by assessee-company at assessment stage which shows that assessee-company filed all the documentary evidences and explanation before A.O. on the […]
BT Global Communications India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Addl. CIT (Delhi ITAT) The only issue to be decided in the present appeal relates to protective adjustment on account of business restructuring that has taken place in assessment year 2010-11. We find that TPO/DRP have made adjustment on substantive basis in assessment year 2010-11. However, since […]
The issue under consideration is whether disallowance of depreciation on car and interest on car loan by AO is justified in law?
whether the additional ground submitted by the assessee should be allowed by the tribunal by considering that the assessee has not claimed exemption in the return filed due to inadvertence?
The issue under consideration is whether the deduction u/s 35DD for demerger expenses is allowed to be claimed by resultant demerged company?
The issue under consideration is whether the disallowance of expenditure u/s 14A by AO without recording a satisfaction is justified in law?
