As the assessee does not have any permanent establishment in India, the incomes arising outside Indian Territories cannot be brought to tax.
Michael Page International Pte Limited Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) ITAT held that unless the recipient of the services, by virtue of rendition of services by the assessee, is enabled to provide the same services without recourse to the service provider, the services cannot be said to have made available the recipient of services. A mere […]
ITAT Mumbai held that re-opening of assessment without ‘reason to believe’ simply based on the information from DGIT(Inv.) is untenable in law.
ITAT Mumbai held that granting of conditional approval under section 80G of the Income Tax Act by PCIT/CIT is unsustainable in the eyes of law.
Merely because entity has not responded to section 133 (6) notice the transaction cannot be doubted and be treated as non-genuine
Since Bogus Purchase expenses were shown by assessee under the head work in progress and has not been reflected in the trading account, therefore, no addition can be made.
Requirement of furnishing audit report in Form No. 10B before due date prescribed in section 44AB mandatory w.e.f. 1.4.2020 only.
ITAT Pune held that surcharge or cess being part of income tax is not allowable as deduction under section 40(a)(ii) of the Income Tax Act.
Hotel Deepak Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) The brief facts are that the assessee firm is engaged in the restaurant business. Pursuant to the survey action u/s.133A of the Act conducted in the business premises of the assessee dated 22.01.2018, the partner of the assessee firm Shri Chandrakant Ramanna Shetty made a voluntary declaration of Rs.26,27,872/- […]
ITAT Mumbai held that as per section 92CA (3A) of the Income Tax Act Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) is required to pass an order within a period of 60 days prior to the date of completion of assessment as per section 153 of the Income Tax Act. Order passed after the date will be barred by limitation.
