ITAT Mumbai held that AO had only recorded general satisfaction but not with reference to the accounts of the assessee and hence has not satisfied the formula contained in rule 8D in order to compute disallowance u/s 14A of the Act.
Maharashtra Hybrid Seeds Company Private Limited Vs PCIT (ITAT Mumbai) PCIT has passed the impugned revision order for the reason that the AO has not properly examined the weighted deduction claimed u/s 35(2AB) of the Act vis-à-vis Form 3CL. However, the AO has reopened the assessment and has examined the above said Form 3CL, but […]
Assessee was entitled to relief on the certificate granted by the prescribed authority u/s 35(1)(ii) of the Act to the institution to which it donated the sum of money for claiming deduction under that section if it was subsisting and valid at the time the donation was made.
ITAT Mumbai held that loan lying in the proprietorship concern books of the assessee is converted as gift during the year under consideration hence there was no fresh receipt of money. Accordingly, addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act is unsustainable.
ITAT Mumbai held that as assessee is having sufficient own funds hence investments which yield exempt income can be presumed to be made out of interest free funds. Accordingly, disallowance of interest in terms of rule 8D(2)(ii) of the Income Tax Rules unsustainable.
ITAT Mumbai held that expenditure relating to film which was not released and hence not co-relatable to any income, cannot be disallowed as the expenses were incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the business.
It is time that Government seriously considers protecting its legitimate interests by ensuring some mechanism to ensure that tax liability on capital gains is duly recovered from borrower whose property is sold, and when it is not possible to do so on account of borrower’s genuine financial difficulties, from person who receives proceeds of sale of such assets.
Foreign Tax Credit – ITAT held that Rules cannot override the Act and therefore the filing of Form. No 67 is not mandatory but it is directory.
Assessee cannot be faulted if the seller is not traceable and also that it is not the burden of assessee to investigate genuineness of seller or their business transaction.
The ITAT allowed the appeals and have sustained that, the demand under Section 200A for computation and intimation for the payment of fee under Section 234E could not be made in purported exercise of power under Section 200A by the respondent for the period of the respective assessment year prior to 1.6.2015.
