Follow Us:

ITAT Delhi

Amount paid for violation of laws not allowable despite Compounding

November 27, 2012 5273 Views 0 comment Print

Now coming to the other aspect on the basis of which the AO disallowed the claim as to whether or not expenditure incurred as a result of compounding of violation of municipal laws & Environmental laws falls within the ambit of aforesaid explanation to sec. 37(1) of the Act, Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in CIT v. Mamta Enterprises [2004] 266 ITR 356 held that compounding of the offence cannot take away the rigors of the Explanation to S.37(1) in view of the expression ‘shall not be deemed to have been incurred’ used in that Explanation.

S. 2(22(e) – Mere transfer of profit by a company cannot be treated as loan

November 25, 2012 1486 Views 0 comment Print

Even though the assessment order mentions date of receipt of profit on sale of shares as 4.2.2004 and the amount is claimed to have been received from the company M/s DN Kansal & Securities (P) Ltd., the AO or the ld. CIT(A) did not analyse the nature of transaction as to how it is loan or advance nor ascertained accumulated profits of the said company until the date of transaction.

Claim made Through invalid revised return can also be considered

November 25, 2012 1583 Views 0 comment Print

The AO examined the details of legal and professional charges paid by the company and noticed that the claim of Rs.5 lacs paid to M/s Kotak Mahindra Capital Company Ltd towards placement fees and earned dividend income which was claimed exempt u/s 10(34) of the Act. The company did not make any disallowance for the purposes of section 14A of the Act.

Mobilization Charges from prospecting of oil and natural gas is to be taxed u/s. 44BB

November 22, 2012 1590 Views 0 comment Print

A reading of Sedco Forex International Inc. (supra), makes it clear that revenues on account of mobilization are to be brought to tax in India. Sedco Forex International Inc. (supra) has been rendered by the Hon’ble Uttarakhand High Court, which happens to be the jurisdictional High Court in the present case. Sedco Forex International Inc. (supra), therefore, is squarely applicable to this case.

Nature of profit from sale of shares depends on intention of acquisition of shares irrespective of its treatment in books

November 18, 2012 1626 Views 0 comment Print

There is no material that shares and securities purchased in the year under consideration and classified as investment in books were actually intended to be held as long term investment. Profits realised by the sale of shares may be capital gain, if the seller is an ordinary investor changing his securities, but it may be business income, if the seller of the shares is trading in shares.

Every entity has a right to carry on its objectives in the manner it considers best

November 18, 2012 1559 Views 0 comment Print

Subsequent reversal of a transaction among group entities isn’t colourable device, if effect carried in ledgers (a) Assessee is a charitable institution, there is no change in it’s objects. It carried on educational institutions and intended to further its objects by opening new schools and a university. (b) APIL owned reserved educational plots and it’s agreements to sale of such reserved plots with group educational trust do not carry any element of primary suspicion.

Addition u/s 68 for no effort by Dept. to verify identity & creditworthiness of creditors not justified

November 7, 2012 2121 Views 0 comment Print

AO and the CIT(A) did not make any effort to verify the confirmations, identity and creditworthiness of the creditors in question and they also ignored the fact that the transaction of cash credits received and its repayment were made through bank and we also hold that the authorities below did not bring any incriminating material or evidence against the assessee trust to establish that the amount shown in the balance sheet as cash credits amounting to Rs.1,70,000 actually belonged or was owned by the assessee trust itself.

Deduction u/s. 80-IB(8A) allowable if approval not withdrawn

November 7, 2012 2147 Views 0 comment Print

Sub-rule (3) of rule 18DA itself provides the consequence of violation of sub-rule (2). As per sub-rule (3), if at any stage it is found that any provisions of the Act or the rules have been violated, the prescribed authority specified may withdraw the approval so granted. Therefore, if there is a violation of sub-rule (2), the prescribed authority has to take action against the assessee by withdrawing the approval.

Powers of Commissioner of Income Tax co-terminus with that of Assessing Officer

November 6, 2012 3577 Views 0 comment Print

It is a settled law that the powers of the Commissioner of Income Tax is co-terminus with that of Assessing Officer. Under the circumstances, the particular enquiry that was not made by the Assessing Officer which was necessary in the facts of the case, should have been done by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A).

Capping of TP adjustments to combined group profits not possible

November 4, 2012 2470 Views 0 comment Print

Interra Information Technologies (India) Private Limited, a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, is a 100% subsidiary of Interra IT Inc., a US based company. Interra IT Inc. enters into contract with customers and subcontracts a part/whole of the work to Interra India.

Search Post by Date
July 2026
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031