Explore the case of ACIT (TDS) Vs Victor Hospitals & Medical Services Limited, where the ITAT Panaji determined TDS under Section 194J for consultant doctors.”
ITAT held that income for purpose of ascertaining ceiling on the basis of book profit, the profit shall be as appearing in the P & L a/c. The interest income, thus, cannot notionally be excluded while determining allowable of deduction of remuneration to partners u/s 40(b)(v) .
ITAT Panaji held that payment of interest on loan taken for paying compensation to the family members of the assessee pursuant to an arbitral award on family settlement has nothing to do with LTCG on sale of the said capital asset. Accordingly, payment of such interest cannot be claimed as deduction u/s 48.
ITAT Panaji held that the only requirement under the provisions of section 80P(2)(d) is that an interest income or dividend income should be earned by a co-operative society from another co- operative society. Section 80P does not make a distinction between income earned on long term investments and short term investments
In respect of levy of interest under Section 201(1A) of the Act the interest is to be computed for the period from the date from which the tax was deductable to the date of filing of the return by the deductee (VTU).
A perusal of the agreement and the above undisputed facts shows that till date no transfer of the property in question has been completed under the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. Still further, the registered sale deed has not been executed by the assessee in favour of the Bank and consequently, sale is not yet completed.
The commission earned by the non-resident agent who carried on the business of selling Indian goods outside India, cannot be said have deemed to be, income which has accrued and/or arisen in India & therefore no occasion to deduct tax at source in respect of the payment made to the non-resident agent arise & thus there is no liability to deduct TDS in such cases.
The ITAT bench of Panaji in the case of Sesa Resources Limited held that the disallowance under Sec 14A read with rule 8D can be made only in respect of investments which are earning income exempt from tax and not the total investments.
Assessing Officer found that the assessee has received a sum of Rs. 29,03,109/- on account of sale of Women’s Day Flags and the same has been credited to the capital fund and he treated the same as revenue receipt. On Appeal Honourable ITAT has held that sale proceeds of flags on Women’s Day are in the nature of capital receipts.
The ITAT Panaji in the case of ACIT Vs. Karishma Global Mineral Pvt. Ltd. held that the sales commission paid by assessee to Singapore based entity is not taxable in India as the same is business profits which cannot be taxed in the hands of foreign company under India
