DCIT Vs Forum Homes Pvt Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai) A reading of Article 12(4) of the tax treaty would make it clear that payment made to a resident of one of the contracting state can be regarded as FTS, if, in course of providing managerial/technical or consultancy services, technical knowledge, experience, skill, know-how or processes is […]
Haresh C Sheth Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) There were justifiable reasons for the assessee in not filing the TRC in the course of the assessment proceedings. But then, we cannot also remain oblivious of the fact that the A.O had declined to apply the special rate of tax as per the DTAA, for the reason, […]
The law is now well settled that for the purpose of deduction u/s.80M of the Act, only actual expenditure incurred has to be taken into consideration and there cannot be any estimate of expenditure that could be made thereon.
Evolutis India Private Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) Enlargement of the scope of MCI regulation to the pharmaceutical companies or other health sector industry by the CBDT is de hors any enabling provision either under the Income Tax Act or under the Indian Medical Council Regulations. In our considered view, though the CBDT can tone down […]
It was held that transfer of shares of a company to a firm or a company, instead of an individual or an HUF, without consideration or at a price lower than the fair market value does not attract Section 56(2)(vii) of the Income Tax Act.
Hon’ble Tribunal uphold the observations of Ld. CIT(A) wherein it was observed that in order to assess the asset/bank account held by a third party in the hands of the respondent assessee the department has to prove that the assessee has direct beneficial interest in the asset/bank account held by third party.
DCIT Vs K.S. Diesels Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai) we are of the considered view that as the assessee as per the terms and conditions of the OTS had during the year under consideration made a payment of interest of Rs.1,91,19,083/- to GIIC out of the interest of Rs.3,23,84,509/- (supra) that was disallowed u/s 43B in the […]
In our considered view, for claiming deduction of interest under Sec. 24(b) of the Act there is neither any such precondition nor an eligibility criteria prescribed that the assessee should have taken possession of the property so purchased or acquired by him.
ITO Vs Sanjay Gurudasmal Chawla (ITAT Mumbai) Assessing Officer rejected the claim of the assessee for deduction u/s. 24(b) of the Act for the reason that the assessee claimed such deduction only by way of revised computation in the course of the assessment proceedings. However, this claim of the assessee was entertained by the Ld.CIT(A). […]
DCIT Vs Surbhit Impex Pvt. Ltd (ITAT Mumbai) It is undisputed position that as on the relevant point of time, the proceedings against the assessee for recovery of these amounts were pending before the Hon’ble judicial forums. It was only on 29.01.2018, i.e., which much after the end of the relevant previous year, that Their […]
