The position under section 161(1) of the Act is that a trustee under a trust cannot be assessed on the aggregate income received by it as a single unit. The assessment in the name of the trustee in terms of the sub-section can be made in two ways.
The learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) erred in allowing the assessees appeal relying on the decision of the Honble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Smt. K.G. Ruminiamma (2011 )331 ITR 211 when the facts of the case are distinguishable from the assessee’s case. In the case of Smt. K.G Ruminiamma
These appeals at the instance of the Revenue are directed against two orders of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), both dated 30.06.2016. The relevant assessment year is 2009-2010.
M/s. K.V. Joseph & Sons Engineering Contractors Vs ACIT (ITAT Cochin) In this case the assessee paid Rs. 200 lakhs as an advance payment to Mr. K.J. Paul to carry out sub contract work of road at Edapally, High Court. The plea of the assessee is that it was incurred for the purpose of business. […]
Hll Biotech Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Cochin) Conclusion: Since assessee-company was still at the pre-commencement stage and during this phase, it had raised equity funds which was invested in fixed deposits of the Banks as well as the holding company and had earned interest on the same, the interest earned had to be taxed as […]
Cochin International Airport Ltd appeal: The Commissioner is empowered to initiate suo moto proceedings under section 263 where the AO takes a wrong decision
It is not discernable whether the interest paid for the acquisition of the impugned property has been claimed by the assessee under Chapter IVC of the Income Tax Act, 1961, namely ‘income from house property’. If the assessee had already claimed interest under the head income from house property, the same interest cannot be capitalized and added to the cost of acquisition of the property.
An institution registered as a Primary Agricultural Credit Society (PACS) was not entitled to obtain Banking License and, therefore, could not be considered as bank not entitled for deduction under section 80P(2).
Tribunal held that the beneficial shareholders of the lender company are partners of the assessee- firm and therefore the deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) has to be assessed only in the hands of the partners and not in the hands of the assessee- firm.
In an assessee- favor ruling, the Cochin bench of ITAT said that the assessee, a primary agricultural credit society is entitled to the benefit of deduction under Section 80P (2) of the Income Tax Act, with regard to interest received on deposits made by the assessee with sub treasury.
