Where individual share of consideration paid towards immovable property purchase by four persons including the assessee amounted to less than Rs. 50 lakhs, the assessee was not liable to deduct tax under section 194IA of Income Tax Act, 1961 even if value of the property purchased under single sale deed was exceeding Rs. 50 lakhs.
New Amazing Shiksha Society Vs. ITO (Exemption (Ward) (ITAT Delhi) Exemption u/s 10(23)(iiiad) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 should not be denied to the assessee as selling of books and uniform to the students of assessee is part of educational activity only. Moreover, the impugned addition was made merely on the basis that surplus […]
ACIT Vs Indian Hotels Company Ltd. (ITAT Delhi) It was the submission of the assessee that credit card commission was out of the realm of section 194H of the Act since there was no principal-agent relationship between the merchant establishment and the bank and, therefore, the provisions relating to tax deduction at source were not […]
Indo-UK DTAA must be read as forming part of Indo-Spain DTAA as well and, therefore, the payment made by the assessee to the Spanish company for fabric testing would not constitute fee for technical services and consequently, section 195 of the Act has no application to such a receipt.
If the assessee has huge interest free funds including the profit earned by it during the year, which is sufficient to cover the advancement of loan, then no interest could be disallowed under section 36(i)(iii).
Shri Baldev Singh Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) We have gone through the orders of the authorities below in the light of the arguments on either side and the decisions of the Hon’ble Apex Court cited above. In the case of Ghanshyam (supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court held in unequivocal terms that the additional amount u/s […]
DCIT Vs Esteem Textiles P. Ltd. (ITAT Delhi) Where AO had framed assessment under section 153C against assessee on basis of a list unearthed pursuant to a search and seizure operation at the premises of a third party, containing name of assessee as an investor, the assessment order was quashed because the said document could […]
Addition under section 68 on account of bogus shre capital was unjustified as the identity and creditworthiness of share subscribers and genuineness of receipt of share capital stood established and non-production of directors of subscriber companies could not be a sole ground to make addition.
Akshay Jain Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) Appeal of the assessee is barred by limitation by 12 days for which the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay stating that after receiving of the order of the ld. CIT (A) on 22.03.2018, assessee has duly handed over the same to his Chartered Accountant, Shri […]
Beam Global Spirits & Wine (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT (ITAT Delhi) Brief of assessee’s facts: 1. Beam India (the assessee), a wholly owned subsidiary of Beam USA, was engaged in the production and sale of alcoholic beverages in India. 2. During AY 2008-09, the assessee entered following ITs with its AE along with outcome […]
