Techknoweledgy Interactive Partners P. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) To make the scheme of section 254(2) workable and to ensure that the limitation period for filing of the appeal is to be computed in a manner in harmony with the law laid down by the Hon’ble High Court above, the limitation period is to be […]
An undisclosed foreign bank account per se can indeed be treated as an asset under section 2(11) of the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income & Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act 2015.
So far as profit attribution of a DAPE is concerned, the legal position is that as long as an agent is paid an arm’s length remuneration for the services rendered, nothing survives for taxation in the hands of the dependent agency permanent establishment.
In our view no addition under section 68 of the Act on account of share capital could have been made only if addition under section 56 of the Act on share premium was also made. This is because Assessing Officer had no reasons to belief that income has escaped assessment under section 68 of the Act being cash credit on account of share premium or share application money or share capital as the case may be.
The quantification of loss, which is well beyond the limited scope of ‘mistake apparent on record’ under section 154], could not have been disturbed in the proceedings under section 154, and what cannot be done under section 154, cannot be done under section 263 r.w.s. 154 either.
Approval granted by superior authority in mechanical manner solely relying upon the implied undertaking obtained from AO in the form of draft assessment order, defeated the very purpose of obtaining approval under section 153D and consequently, impugned assessment relatable to search was non est and a nullity and was, therefore, quashed.
Assessee was paid severance pay due to loss of employment and the receipt of severance pay though the nomenclature was not mentioned as ex-gratia but took the character of a capital receipt and the payment was made voluntary by the employer for loss of employment and such capital receipt was not taxable in the hands of the assessee.
ITO Vs Rajeev Suresh Ghai (ITAT Mumbai) It is always useful to bear in mind the fact that, on the first principles, the trigger for taxation of an income in a source jurisdiction is either the economic activity or the linkage of an income with that jurisdiction, and that in the absence of such a […]
Jasmin K. Ajmera Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) It is settled legal proposition that the confession need corroboration with evidences. Though admission is an important piece of evidence but it is not conclusive and it is open to the assessee to show that it is incorrect. Therefore, retracted admission, in the absence of any incriminating material, […]
United Waterproofing Corporation Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) We note that Ld. CIT(A) has enhanced the addition on account of bogus purchases to 100% of the bogus purchases as against 12.5% applied by the AO. The only reason given by the Ld. CIT(A) is that the assessee has failed to prove the genuineness of purchases and […]
