Payments made to various artists participating in reality show would fall under section 194C and not under section 194J and there was no infirmity in the action of AO as assessee had rightly deducted TDS u/s 194C.
Navas M. Meeran Vs ACIT (ITAT Cochin) Conclusion: Lease rent received by assessee by letting out the industrial undertaking was not having any direct connection with the manufacture or production of an article or thing by assessee and the same could not be considered as business income eligible for deduction u/s. 80IB. Held: Assessee had […]
Disallowance under section 43B could not be done in respect of provision for gratuity made for the benefit of the employees for the reason that no actual payment was made.
M/s. Johns Biwheelers Vs. ACIT (ITAT Cochin) In this case, the assessee was required to get his books of account audited and filed along with the return of income u/s. 44AB within the due date of 30/09/2013 for the assessment year 2013-14. However, the audit report was furnished only on 28/03/2014. The contention of the […]
Merely because the sale price is fixed through a negotiated settlement will not take away the proceedings from the Land Acquisition Act when the relevant provision of the Act are invoked.
Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd Vs DCIT (ITAT Cochin) In the present case, there were no affidavits from the concerned persons who are handling the impugned issues and who are required to take proper steps in filing the appeals before the CIT(A). In our opinion, the decision of the co-ordinate Bench is without doubt binding upon […]
The assessee had not filed the audit report in this case. The assessee was very casual and did not enter appearance for the show cause notice issued for imposition of penalty. The assessee has not made out a reasonable cause as mentioned u/s 273B of the I.T.Act for non-furnishing of audit report u/s 44AB of the I.T.Act. Hence, we are of the view that the penalty u/s 271B of the I.T.Act has been rightly imposed. It is ordered accordingly.
Foreign agent commission and reimbursement of expenditure were not taxable in India and hence, section 195 had no application.
DCIT Vs Hema Mohanlal Divyasree (ITAT Cochin) We have carefully perused the JDA entered between the assessee and the developer. As per the JDA (in page 3 para 4), the construction should have completed and the share of build up area marked for the assessee ought to have been handed over within 36 months of obtaining necessary […]
ITO Vs M/s. Lakshdweep Development Corporation Limited (ITAT Cochin) Interest on delayed payment of VAT and TDS is only compensatory and is not penal in nature. Therefore, the CIT(A) has correctly deleted the disallowance made for the interest expenditure claimed on delayed payment of VAT and TDS. FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGMENT These appeals […]
