ITAT Visakhapatnam

Mere share transfer agreement does not cause effective share transfer unless accompanied with Transfer form & Share Certificates

Y.V. Ramana Vs CIT (ITAT Visakhapatnam)

In the case of shares of unlisted companies, transfer would take place, only when valid share transfer form in form no. 7B is delivered to the company and endorsed by the Company. Therefore, for effective transfer of shares a mere agreement for transfer of shares is not sufficient, unless it is physically transfer shares by delivery of sh...

Read More

S. 35(2AB): AO bound to grant deduction if R&D facility is approved by competent authority

Efftronics Systems Pvt. Ltd vs. ACIT (ITAT Visakhapatnam)

Provisions of section 35(2AB) of the Act, with relevant rules makes it mandatory for the assessee company to file its application for approval of its in house R&D before the Secretary, DSIR, Government of India....

Read More

Land cannot be classified as non-agricultural for mere agricultural activity absence

Smt. Chalasani Naga Ratna Kumari Vs ITO, (ITAT Visakhapatnam)

Whether an agricultural land held by assessee, which is suitable for agricultural operation, loses the characteristics of agricultural land merely because no agricultural operation was carried by assessee on such land?...

Read More

Section 50C Market Value on sale deed date or stamp duty value on sale agreement date

Chalasani Naga Ratna Kumari, Visakhapatnam Vs ITO, Ward-3(2) (ITAT Visakhapatnam)

For determination of capital gains according to section 50C market value of property as on date of sale deed or stamp duty value as on date of agreement to sale: which has to be taken?...

Read More

Retrospective amendment in expl. 5A to Sec 271(1)(c) not applicable if original return filed before Finance Act comes into force

Nukala Ramakrishna, Eluru Vs DCIT (ITAT Visakhapatnam)

Amendment in Explanation 5A to Sec 271(1)(c) even when made effective by Finance Act ,2009 with retrospective effect from 01.06.2007 cannot be made applicable to assessee’s case because both original return and the revised return u/s 153A of the Act have been filed before the amended provisions were brought into the statute (which rece...

Read More

Clash of titans, sec 192 Vs sec 206AA

Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Ltd. Vs Addl CIT (TDS), (ITAT Visakhapatnam)

Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Ltd. v. Addl CIT (TDS), ITAT Visakhapatnam) Even if there is no PAN, if the deductor has deducted TDS as per provisions of sec 192, Section 206AA does not over-ride section 192 in terms of the requirement of “at the rates specified in the relevant provisions of the Act....

Read More

For Deemed Dividend, accumulated profits do not include current year’s business profit, since it accrues only at end of year

P. Satya Prasad Vs Income-tax Officer, Ward-3(2), Visakhapatnam (ITAT Visakhapatnam)

Thus, it has been held that the accumulated profits do not include current year's business profit, since it accrues only at the end of the year. Further the loan or advance treated as deemed income up to the date of fresh loan is to be reduced from the accumulated profits. Consistent with the view taken by the Ahmedabad bench in the above...

Read More

s.40(a)(ia) apply only to expenditure remaining payable

Rajamahendri Shipping & Oil Field Services Ltd., Vs. Addl. CIT (ITAT Visakhapatnam)

Provisions of sec.40(a)(ia) would apply only to the expenditure which remain payable as at the end of the relevant financial year. Assessee entitled to claim deduction of expenses if the TDS deducted there on is remitted before the due date for filing the return of income. ...

Read More

S.40(a)(ia) not applicable to amounts paid by 31st March

Merilyn Shipping & Transports Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax (ITAT Vishakha Patanam)

Merilyn Shipping & Transports v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM (SPECIAL BENCH) Whether Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act can be invoked only to disallow expenditure of the nature referred to therein which is shown as payable as on the date of the balance sheet or it can be invoked also to disallow such e...

Read More

Reassessment after completion of assessment u/s 143(3) cannot be termed as regular assessment and interest u/s 234D not chargeable

Dredging Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. ACIT (ITAT Visakhapatnam)

The assessee was given refund while processing the return u/s. 143(1) and further refund was given after assessment u/s. 143(3). In reassessment proceedings u/s. 147, the refund given earlier became collectible from the assessee. The Assessing officer levied interest u/s. 234D on such excess refund amount. The learned CIT(A) held that the...

Read More
Page 1 of 3123

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (3,480)
Company Law (3,398)
Custom Duty (6,601)
DGFT (3,446)
Excise Duty (4,043)
Fema / RBI (3,249)
Finance (3,453)
Income Tax (25,012)
SEBI (2,733)
Service Tax (3,280)