M/s Jaylaxmi Land Developers Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmadabad) There cannot be any addition made in the hands of the partnership firm on account of the capital contributed by the partner of the firm to the firm. In case any justification is required for the source of fund in the hands of the partner, then partner […]
Retrospective amendment in law does change tax liability in respect of an income, with retrospective effect, but it cannot change tax withholding liability, with retrospective effect.
Commission paid to non-resident agent was not liable to tax under the provisions of act when the services were rendered outside India, payments were made outside India and there was no permanent establishment or business connection in India, therefore, assessee was not required to deduct TDS u/s 195(2).
ACIT Vs M/s. Bansal Ship Breakers P. Ltd. (ITAT Ahmedabad) Any person responsible for collecting taxes (TCS) under section 206(1) need not to do so if he obtains a declaration from the buyer that he is purchasing the goods for re-use in manufacturing process or producing article or things. It does not say that such […]
Assessee was entitled to claim exemption under section 54F on gain earned on the sale of factory shed as factory shed inherently being long-term capital asset as per the provision of Section 2(42A) even if sale of factory shed was subject to short-term capital gain on the basis of deeming provision as specified under section 50.
Shri Hitesh H Budhbhatti Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad) The allowability of interest expenditure on borrowed capital for purchase of residential house under s.24 of the Act is in question. As per Section 23(2) of the Act, the gross annual value of the residential house shall be taken at ‘nil’ where such house is in the […]
Payment to the film distributors is not subject to TDS and therefore disallowing expense by invoking the provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) is not justified
Income from purchase and sale of shares was liable to be taxed under the capital gain instead of income under the head business and profession as the frequency, magnitude of transaction in a systematic manner could not be the criteria to hold that assessee was engaged in the business activity of shares.
Provision for interest liability which was accrued but not provided for in books of account would be deductible under section 36(1)(iii) of Income Tax Act, 1961.
Assessee is eligible for exemption u/s 54F for the amount invested beyond the prescribed period but before getting the property registered since there was sufficient reason, beyond the control of the assessee, which prevented the assessee from making investment within prescribed time.
