Article 2(1) of the India-UAE DTAA provides that the taxes covered shall include tax and surcharge thereon. Education cess is nothing but an additional surcharge & is also covered by the definition of taxes.
Assessee was eligible to claim tax credit both federal as well as state taxes paid on the income earned during the year as section 91 did not discriminate between State and Federal taxes, and in effect provides for both the types of Income-taxes to be taken into account for the purpose of tax credits against Indian Income-tax liability.
Conclusion: Since assessee- AOP was a trust formed for the benefit of a sole beneficiary, therefore, applying individual tax rates to assessee-AOP was not a mistake apparent on the face of the record and therefore, it could not be rectified through Section 154.
In the matter f Issue of Share at High Premium AO should not resort to rely on circumstantial evidence or on test of human probabilities but on factual evidence of passing of benefit to the shareholders/directors. Hence ITAT remanded the matter back to AO to re-assess whether the assessee was used as a vehicle to pass on the benefit to the shareholder / director.
Explore the judgment by ITAT Hyderabad in Apna Incable Broad Band Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT, addressing depreciation on network rights and technical service fee disallowance.
Ifthe employees’ share of contribution is paid before the due date of filing the return u/s 139(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 then no disallowance can be made.
Shri Rajkumar Mandhani Vs DCIT (ITAT Hyderabad) In the case before us, the assessee and his wife are independent income tax assessees and the assessee already owned one house at Kilpauk, Chennai. The assessee therefore, cannot be said to have invested in order to avoid capital gains to tax in his hands, as u/s 54F(1), […]
ACIT Vs Nekkanti Sea Foods Ltd. (ITAT Hyderabad) there was a delay of 92 days in filing this C.O. by the assessee, for which an application for condonation of delay was filed by the assessee, wherein, inter-alia, the assessee stated that since there was a delay in getting the signatures of the MD of the company who […]
Shri Srinivasa Reddy Yenumula Vs ITO (ITAT Hyderabad) As regards the addition of Rs.18.00 lakhs towards unexplained investment is concerned, the learned Counsel for the assessee placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT vs. Bharat Engg. & Construction Co. reported in (1972) 83 ITR 0187 wherein […]
Shri Bhagwandas Nagla Vs ITO (International Taxation) (ITAT Hyderabad) Conclusion: TDS under section 195 was to be deducted in case payment for purchase of immovable property made to GPA (general power of attorney) holder of non-residents because, at best, GPA holder could be considered as only a conduit between assessee and the owners of property […]
