ITAT Mumbai held that the determination of Arm’s Length Price (ALP) without applying any methods as prescribed under section 92C(1) of the Income Tax Act by the TPO is not tenable in law.
Held that prior to 1-4- 2024 there was no bar on assessee claiming exemption under section 10 (23EC) and under section 11 and 12 of the act. Accordingly, contribution received from commodity exchange and members thereof is exempt u/s 10(23EC) of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Mumbai held that any expenditure incurred for purpose of earning income chargeable under the head ‘income from other sources’ is allowable as deduction u/s. 57(iii) of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Mumbai held that the Indian Subsidiary operating in an independent manner doesn’t constitute as a “Permanent Establishment” in India and hence income of the assessee is not allowable to be taxed in India.
ITAT Mumbai held that provisions of Section 43CA of the Income Tax Act are effective only from 1st April 2014. Accordingly, the same are not applicable when part payment was received in 2010.
ITAT Mumbai held that addition u/s. 68 of the Income Tax Act merely based on statement of the key person which was retracted subsequently unsustainable as genuineness, identity and creditworthiness proved.
In this article, we discuss ITAT Mumbai’s decision in Hiranandani Healthcare Pvt Ltd vs CIT case regarding set-off of brought forward losses and impact of Section 79 on individual shareholding changes.
ITAT Mumbai held that the levy of penalty under section 271AAB of the Income Tax Act is not mandatory or automatic and same needs to be examined depending upon the facts and circumstances of the case.
ITAT Mumbai held that receipt of rental income by giving the land on lease to the LLP and non-utilization of the said land does not preclude the assessee to treat the same as agricultural income. Accordingly, the same is exempt.
Read how ITAT Mumbai imposes a cost of Rs 5,000 on Edifice Properties Pvt Ltd for non-compliance with notices in their appeal against the CIT(A) order.
