Trimurti Films Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) In the given case, the assessee was using the bungalow and land together for the film production as part of business assets. Since the film production is stopped, it has separated the bungalow and vacant land. It uses the bungalow for storage for its own purpose and […]
Sharda Mandir High School Vs CIT (ITAT Mumbai) The Mumbai Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has ruled that the unregistered Association of Persons formed by agreement merging two charitable Trusts eligible for exemption under Income Tax. The appellant Sharda Mandir High School which is an Association of person (AOP), against order passed by […]
Procter & Gamble Health Limited Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) Undisputedly, the assessing officer had disallowed 50% of the total cost incurred by the assessee towards free samples in the relevant assessment years. Whereas, simply relying upon the decision of the learned DRP in assessment year 2013-14, learned Commissioner (Appeals) has restricted the disallowance to 20% […]
Section 10(38) exempts only a stream of capital gain from tax and not the entire source. So if the assessee incurs loss in sale of equity shares, the gain from sale of which is exempt under section 10(38), then such loss will be allowed to be set off against long-term capital gain from sale of shares as well from sale of other assets.
ITO Vs Sandeep S. Dagaria (ITAT Mumbai) ITAT notices that Assessing Officer has merely proceeded to make addition of Rs.7,00,000/- unsecured loans merely because the Rajat Group of Companies involved in the transaction of bogus purchases and rejected the evidences submitted before him i.e. assessee has submitted the confirmation balance and the transactions were only […]
Where main object or purpose of assessee s charitable trust was promotion of sports and swimming, merely because trust collected certain charges from coaching campus, same could not alter its character of being charitable.
We find that the provisions of section 56(2)(viib) of the Act are applicable only for consideration for issue of shares received by a company from any person who is a resident. Admittedly, the monies have been received in the instant case by the assessee company from a non-resident. Hence the provisions of section 56(2)(viib) of the Act are also not applicable in the instant case.
DCIT Vs Omni Active Health Technologies Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai) Briefly, the assessee is in the business of trading of healthcare and Nutraceuticals Products. The assessee is being granted patents for the one of its process in United States. A US based company filed suit against the appellant in July, 2008 for infringement of the patents […]
ACIT Vs Vinay Girish Bajpai (ITAT Mumbai) Assessee claimed that he has complied with all the requirements of claiming exemption/deduction under section 54 of the IT Act. He submitted that assessee has made the payment to the builder within the stipulated time. There was some issue of obtaining the completion certificate by the builder. Hence, […]
During the year under consideration also the assessee could not substantiate with relevant evidences that these expenses were related to loan syndication fees and the same was claimed as Investment Advisory Services without any break up of the detail of loan advances arranged by these two parties.
