The loss arising on account of payment made towards purchase of commodities, which were never delivered to assessee, shall be allowable as regular business loss u/s 28 of the Act and the said loss cannot be considered as speculative.
Tech Mahindra Business Services Ltd Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) Undisputedly, the assessee has earned the interest income from the deposit made towards bank guarantee and temporary parking of surplus funds. It is evident, the assessee has no other activity of earning income except export of ITES through its 10A unit. Thus, it can be safely […]
Trimble Solutions Corporation Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) We find that the issue involved in the present appeal i.e as to whether the payments received by the assessee from its distributor for sale of specialized software and maintenance and support services (including upgrades) could be held as “royalty” as per Article 12 of the India-Finland tax […]
Red Hat India Private Limited Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) Upon careful consideration we find that assessee has been following consistent system of revenue recognition. The assessee is inter alia engaged in the business of marketing, promotion and sale of ‘Red Hat subscriptions’ to customers in Indian sub-continent to avail support services that are for the […]
Reliance Globalcom Limited Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) Conclusion: Standby Maintenance Charges received by assessee from TCL could not be assessed as FTS and was its “business income‟ that was taxable only to the extent of its reference to the “business connection” in India. Turnover (receipts) of Standby Maintenance Charges from TCL i.e attributable to the […]
Tata Motors Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) M/s. Tata Motors Ltd. (Appellant) filed an appeal against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), computing set-off of Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) credit under Section 115JAA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the IT Act) excluding surcharge and cess resulting in short grant of MAT credit […]
ITAT Mumbai expressed doubts on correctness of decisions of coordinate benches on dividend distribution tax (DDT) rate being restricted by treaty provision dealing with taxation of dividends in the hands of shareholders.
Liability under section 201(1A), which could only proceed on the foundational assumption that tax was deductible at source by the person making payment in question, will end up exonerating the person, in whose hands the income is taxable, of liability under section 234B.
Since the revision proceedings u/s 263 had been apparently triggered only based on borrowed satisfaction i.e Audit Objection and not based on independent application of mind by PCIT therefore, the revision order passed by PCIT u/s 263 was hereby directed to be quashed.
Yash Raj Films Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) Since, ex-parte order has been passed by the learned CIT(A), this is a fit case for remanding the appeal before the learned CIT(A) to give more effective opportunity to the assessee and the assessee is also directed to cooperate with the expeditious disposal of the appeal […]
