Neelkamal Realtors Suburban Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) ITAT find that identical issue has been decided by the co-ordinate Bench in case of Emdee Digitronics Pvt. Ltd Vs. PCIT in ITA No. 361/Kol/2019 dated 28th June, 2019, wherein the co-ordinate Bench in Para No.12 relying on the decision of M/s Naaraayani Sons Pvt. Limited, […]
There is absolutely no dispute that the foreign reinsurers does not have any place of business in India / permanent establishment in India / branch established in India / Liaison office in India. Hence, any payment made by the assessee company to such foreign insurers would not be chargeable to tax in the hands of the foreign reinsurers in India in terms of Section 195(1) of the Act.
Merely because of organizing seminars itself cannot make the trust non charitable or commercial. In our considered view, the invoking of section 2(15) of the Act merely because of revenue from organizing seminar cannot make the trust looses the character of charity.
Hon’ble Supreme Court held that certificate under Section 65B (4) of The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 is a condition precedent to the admissibility of evidence by way of electronic record as S. 65B (4) of The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 is a mandatory.
DCIT Vs Shoreline Hotels Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai) In these cases, the AO reopened the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) of the Act, on the basis of information received from the DGIT (Inv.) Mumbai to the effect that during the previous year the assessee had obtained fake purchase bills from bogus parties who used to […]
Yogesh Mehra Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) Co-ordinate Bench has given categorical finding that all these loans and advances given to different companies by other companies are in the nature of loans and advances out of commercial consideration and business expediency. The co-ordinate Bench has given detailed reasons which stated that company has purchased land in […]
Wanbury Limited Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) ITAT find that during the year, the assessee has not earned any exempt income and further assessee denied that it has incurred any expenditure. Now therefore it is mandatory on part of the learned assessing officer to record a satisfaction that the claim of the assessee is not correct. […]
Purushotamdas Goenka Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) We find that in this case ,three properties owned by the assessee in Amritsar namely Madanmohan Malviya Road, Amritsar, Punjab, property at Moonlight Building, Katra Ahluwalia and Ramkin Joint property at MM Malviya Road, Amritsar remained vacant throughout the year though the same were let out in A.Y. 2015-16. […]
Ratilal & Sons Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) For invoking provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act, following conditions need to be cumulatively satisfied:- (i) there should be an expenditure; (ii) expenditure should be in mode other than prescribed by the section; and (iii) amount of expenditure should be more than Rs. 20,000. As stated in […]
Sanjay S. Dutt Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) The solitary issue urged in the present appeal by the ld. Representative for the assessee is with regard to assessee’s claim of exemption under section 54F of the Act. Undisputedly, the assessee was joint owner of property having 27% share. The 73% share in property was that of […]
