Jain Studios Ltd. & Anr. Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) Mere making of a claim which had not been accepted, would not per se tantamount to furnishing of inaccurate particulars to attract penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of Income Tax Act, 1961. Bare perusal of explanation furnished by the assessee went to prove that it had come up […]
Sh. Ravinder Taneja Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) As assessment under section 158BC itself has been quashed, thus, the penalty levied in respect of the income assessed under said assessment order cannot survive. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the lower authorities and cancel the penalty levied under section 158BFA(2) of the Act. FULL TEXT […]
Sudha Garg Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) The assessing officer made the assessment order u/s 147/143(3). The only issue involved in this appeal is regarding computation of long term capital gain on sale of property located at Ghaziabad. The assessee has declared the long term capital gain on the sale of the said property claiming real […]
Vijay Sachdev Vs JCIT (ITAT Delhi) It is well settled law that non-consideration of decision of Jurisdictional High Court is mistake apparent from record. Ld. Counsel for the assessee, therefore, rightly contended that Ld.CIT(A) did not follow the judgement of the Jurisdictional High Court and shall have to rectify the mistake in his order in […]
M/s Outworks Solutions [P] Ltd Vs JCIT (ITAT Delhi) No doubt, the assessee claimed write off as bed debt but it is equally true that the assessee did explain the sequence of events which prompted it for the said write off. There is no denying that the assessee does not fulfill the conditions mandated in […]
M/s. Nov Sara India Pvt. Ltd Vs Addl. CIT (ITAT Delhi) Software development expenditure which was held to be capital expenditure by the Assessing Officer holding that it has given a benefit of enduring nature to the assessee. The claim of the assessee is that same is a license fee and, therefore, it cannot be […]
M/s Inspectorate Singapore Pte. Ltd. Vs ADIT (ITAT Delhi) Assessee was under the belief that due to the ‘make available’ Clause in Article 12 (4) (b) of India Singapore DTAA, the consideration paid by the Indian customers to assessee cannot be regarded as ‘fees for technical services’ and further since there was no transfer of technology […]
ITAT had held that there is no principal-agent relationship between the bank issuing the bank guaranee of the assessee. The ITAT Mumbai Bench had further noted that while it is termed as |guarantee commission|, the same is not in the nature of commission
M/s Hero Moto Corp Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) As regards to Ground, relating to disallowance of cost of scrap material amounting to Rs.6.34 lacs, it can be seen that in the course of the business of manufacturing, the process generates some scrap on account of rejection of components, obsolescence of components, etc. In the […]
It is seen that the company has completed full-length animated commercial film during the year under consideration. We note that no separate revenue and expenditure on this activity of making animated film is reported in the Annual Report. Since the activity of making animated film is functionally different from the activity of software development services and thus the segment of ‘software development and services’ of the company, cannot be compared with the functions of the assessee.
