An associate enterprise itself would not to be taken as a comparable since lacking the independent nature of an uncontrolled transaction in forming hallmark of Chapter X of the Act. We thus delete the impugned arms length price adjustment on receivables for this precise reason alone.
The Hon’ble ITAT deleted the transfer pricing adjustment on account of interest on receivables due to failure of revenue authorities to find out even a single comparable in assessee’s segment charging interest in uncontrolled market conditions.
Sanctuary Television Pvt. Limited Vs DCIT (ITAT Hyderabad) The PCIT holds that in this case administrative expenses were in the nature of pre-operative expenditure which could not be set-off against the assessee’s foregoing interest income. And that the Assessing Officer’s action allowing the assessee’s claim in a very casual and mechanical manner deserves to be […]
Appellant contended that such contribution is made for empowerment of women however, the CIT(A) in its order observed that although the expenditure was for a noble cause, it has no nexus contribution made and the income generated for the business of the Appellant company under Section 37 of the IT Ac
Penalty under Section 272A(2)(k) could not be imposed merely for the delay in filing Quarterly TDS Statement as the entire tax along with interest thereon had been deposited in to Govt. account and later, assessee filed quarterly TDS returns for all the quarters and Revenue had not suffered any loss because tax deducted was already deposited on time and there was mere technical or venial breach to provisions contained in Act for submitting return/statements of TDS.
No addition could be made under section 69B because the two pieces of evidence relied on by Revenue Authorities viz., the data retrieved from the Pen-drive and the admission by the vendors of the property though might have a persuasive value but would not have much substantive evidentiary value in order to make additions in the hands of the assessee.
AO was justified in treating the payment to ROC for increase in capital as capital expenditure as ROC expenses was fees for enhancement of capital.
DCIT Vs Monster.Com (India) Private Limited (ITAT Hyderabad) In the assessee’s own case the Tribunal observed that the assessee followed appropriate revenue recognition method of accounting and thus the income declared on proportional receipt basis cannot be questioned. This order was followed by the ITAT in the assessee’s own case in the A.Ys 2007-08 to […]
ITO Vs Suresh Babu Vasireddy (ITAT Hyderabad) The assessee is basically engaged in the business as a real estate agent in Hyderabad deriving commission income. The modus operandi of the business activity is that of identifying properties for sale in Hyderabad and simultaneously identify the interested buyers and sell the properties with a marginal profit. […]
The Advocates Mutually Aided Cooperative Society Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Hyderabad) FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT HYDERABAD These appeal filed by the Assessee as well as Revenue are directed against CIT(A) – 7, Hyderabad’s separate orders, dated 21/02/2019 for AY 2011-12 & 2014-15 involving proceedings u/s 143(3) rws 147of the Income Tax Act, […]
