As could be seen, the compensation received by the assessee was not for his professional activities but for settlement of dispute between him and some other party resulting in filing of a criminal complaint. That being the case, the amount received towards compensation/damage cannot fit in to the definition of income as per section 2(24) r.w.s 4 of the Act.
Shri Mukesh Choksi Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) It was submitted that the case of the assessee was akin to the share brokers and therefore only the commission should be considered as receipts of the assessee and not the purchase/ sale value of shares. In our view the claim had been rightly rejected by the CIT(A). […]
ITO Vs Sunil Shiv Khanna (ITAT Mumbai) We are of the view that the assessee’s claim of deduction u/s. 54 of the Act is to be reckoned from the date of handing over of the possession of the flat by the builder to the assessee i.e. 11.09.2009, and if we take that date, the assessee […]
DCIT Vs Deepak Shashi Bhusan Roy (ITAT Mumbai) The coordinate bench of Tribunal in Anita D. Kanjani (supra) held that in order to determine the nature of asset income of section 2(42A), holding period is to be computed from date of issue of allotment letter and not from the date when agreement to sell was […]
All India Rubber Industry Association Vs. ADIT (E) (ITAT Mumbai) The Mumbai bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT ) has held that a charitable entity cannot be denied the tax benefits merely because some element of its income is exempt from the Principles of Mutuality. The objects of the assessee are for […]
DCIT Vs Ozoneland Agro (P) Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai) In this AO had ‘tampered’ with provisions of the Act. It was beyond jurisdiction of AO to insist upon a particular system, which especially allows assessee to choose one of the two methods. Until and unless legislature amends provision of the Act and prescribes only one method […]
Chand N. Bhojwani Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) AO was bound to compute the tax payable by the assessee on the income computed by him even if it was at a lesser figure than the income returned by the assessee. AO was unjustified in not giving full effect to the assessee on having himself assessed such […]
UB Ostan (India) Private Limited Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) It is clearly evident that an appeal u/s 253 to the Tribunal is required to be filed in prescribed Form No. 36 and the same is to be signed by the persons specified in Sub-rule (2) of Rule 45. As per Sub-rule (2) of Rule 45, […]
DCIT Vs Mizuho Corporate Bank Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai) We shall now advert to the issue as regards the allowability of the interest paid by the branch of the assessee bank to its head office as an expenditure in the hands of the branch office. We find that the claim of the assessee as regards the […]
M/s. Indian Plastics Institute Vs Assistant Director of Income Tax Officer (ITAT Mumbai) Considering that the activities of the assessee-trust are for advancement and development for the benefit of its members and public, the art, science, technology and engineering of plastics, natural and synthetic and other related materials which is achieved through regular technical lectures, […]
