Booking of flat in an apartment under construction must also be viewed as a method of constructing residential tenements. Commencement of construction is not relevant for the purpose of sec. 54 and it is only the completion of construction.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Mumbai bench, on Wednesday furnished an order which ensure that tax payers are not charged penalty for unspecified reasons.
ACIT Vs. Everest Industries Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai) 1. The only grievance of the revenue in this appeal is that the provisions of section 50C of the Act mandates that where a transfer of capital asset being land or building or both is for consideration less then its value as adopted/assessed by the State Government for […]
IT authority has no option/jurisdiction to meddle in the matter either by directing the assessee to maintain its accounts in a particular manner or adopt a different method for valuing the work-in-progress.
Explore ITAT Mumbai’s order on Apax Partners India vs. DCIT regarding transfer pricing, legal fees, and travel expenses. Key insights on taxation under section 40(a)(ia)
Shri Nilesh Janardan Thakur Vs. ITO (ITAT Mumbai) The AOs case is that the assessee has received money without any consideration which is taxable under the provisions of section 56(2)(vi) of the Act. The AO has brought out number of reasons to come to the conclusion that money is taxable u/s 56(2)(vi) of the Act. […]
Unless, a debt due by somebody has been created in favour of assessee, it cannot be said that he has acquired a right to receive the income or that income has accrued to him. An amount can accrue to assessee if he acquires a legally enforceable right to receive it from the debtor.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Mumbai bench recently pronounced that Export incentives are not Includable while computing eligible profits for deduction under Section 80IC of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Linklaters Vs Dy. DIT (ITAT Mumbai) Though the lower authorities had rejected the claim of the assessee that it did not have any ‘PE’ during the period November, 2008 to March, 2009, and rather concluded that the assessee had a ‘PE’ in India during the year under consideration, however we find that no concrete reasoning […]
Meera Enterprises Vs. ITO (ITAT Mumbai) The Chartered Accountant had prepared the return along with the necessary annexures on 15-10-2010 but due to heavy pressure on computer server of the Centralized Processing Center (CPC) Income Tax Department, Bangalore, the return filing was slow till 8 p.m. Thereafter the Chartered Accountant tried to upload the income […]
