The Hyderabad Bench of the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal [the Tribunal] has in the case of M/S Convergys Information Management (India) (F) Ltd. v. DCIT [ITA no. 299/Hl/2009] , held that in a cost plus arrangement expenses incurred post the date of entering into agreement has to be marked up, as no customer would pay mark up before entering into agreement.
The Hyderabad bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal) recently pronounced its ruling in the case of ADP Private Limited v. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (Hyderabad Bench), ITA No: 155/Hyd/2009 , on transfer pricing issues arising from provision of software services by the Taxpayer to its Associated enterprise (AE). The Tribunal ruled in favour of the Revenue upholding the adjustment proposed by the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO).
DDIT(E)-II Vs. M/s. Rock Church Ministries (ITAT Hyderabad ) The purpose of section 13(1)(c) is to deprive a religious or charitable trust from exemption if it is found that its income is used or applied, directly or indirectly, for the benefit of the specified persons. Section 13(1)(c) carves out a general exception wherein the provisions of sections 11 and 12 will not operate on account of user or application of any income of the trust for any direct or indirect benefit of the any specified persons. It is an undisputed fact that the rent paid of Rs. 9,500 is not excessive even as per the old provisions of municipal. The assessee paid the rent as per the old municipal taxes. The present rental value would be much more than the rent paid by the assessee for the property having a building of 4000 sq. Ft. on a land admeasuring 15,000 sq. ft. that too in a prime locality in the city of Hyderabad. The market rent i.e., Rs. 80,000 per month as estimated by the Government Valuer is much more to the rent paid by the assessee. The Assessing Officer could not establish that the rent paid by the assessee is excessive and the rental value estimated by the Government valuer is incorrect. The contention of the Revenue that there is variation in the name in the municipal records and I.T. records is also baseless as the name in the municipal records is in abbreviated form.
Pyramid Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Hyderabad) – The issues taken up by the CIT for revision of assessment under section 263 of the Act, namely, work-in-progress & closing stock, opening stock, and dis-allowance of expenditure on account of various heads, have already been considered by the assessing officer in the assessment proceedings under section 143(3) of the Act.
Navayuga Info tech Private Limited Vs DCIT (ITAT Hyderabad)- Expenditure incurred on foreign travel, spent in foreign exchange, is to be reduced from the export turnover for the purpose of the computation of the deduction under s 10A. Interest on term deposits, profit on exchange variation, etc, do not form part of the profits and gains derived from the industrial undertakings qualifying for the exemption under s 10A.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (the “Tribunal”) of Hyderabad, on 31 January 2011, pronounced its ruling in the case of M/s Convergys Information Management (India) (P) Ltd. Vs DCIT, Hyderabad, ITA No. 229/H/2009, on whether the expenses incurred p
Though a judgement of a non-jurisdictional High Court prevails over a judgement of the Special Bench, the former cannot be followed, even though it is the only High Court judgement on the point, if “rendered without having been informed about certain statutory provisions that are directly relevant“.
Hyderabad bench of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal) in the case of Hyderabad Chemicals Supplies Limited v. ACIT (ITA No. 352/Hyd/2005) (Judgment date: 21 January 2011) held that as per the provision of Section 80-IA(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) profit from the eligible undertaking has to be computed after deduction of the notional brought forward losses and depreciation of eligible undertaking even though they have been allowed to set off against other income in earlier years.
Incomes exempt under the regular provisions of the ITA would be liable to tax under MAT if they are not expressly excluded under the Explanation providing permissible adjustments to be made in computing the book profit.
Merely because the long term capital gain is exempt under section 47(iv) under the normal provision of the Act, it is not correct to say that it is also to be reduced from the net profit for the purpose of computing book profit under section 115JB of the Act when the Explanation to section 115JB does not provide for any deduction in terms of section 47(iv)
