The issue under consideration is whether Section 14A will be applicable on Profit sharing from Partnership Firm, which is exempt in the hands of partners?
The issue under consideration is whether the penalty levied u/s 271AAB of the Act is justified on Income voluntarily admitted during Search by Appellant?
The issue under consideration is whether CIT(A) is correct in holding that the appellant is not a state under Article 289 of the Constitution of India and therefore, liable to tax under the Income Tax Act?
Once R&D facility has been recognized by competent authority, then deductions provided u/s 35(2AB) cannot be denied, merely for the reason that approval of expenditure for impugned year in prescribed form has not been received from competent authority.
The issue under consideration is whether A.O. is correct by adding long term capital gains by applying section 50C in case where land is transferred by the partner in his firm as capital contribution?
DCIT Vs JSW Limited (ITAT Mumbai) The issue under consideration is whether A.O. is correct in restricting the disallowance under section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, without appreciating the fact that the appellant company has not earned any tax-exempt income during the relevant assessment year? As per Section 14A of the Act, the […]
Haresh Khiamal Nanwani Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) The issue under consideration is whether ACIT is correct in treating the sale of investments in immovable properties as a business activity rather than considering it as capital gains, in spite of the appellant holding the flats for more than 36 months. Assessee state that, he had shown […]
Gurgaon Investment Ltd. Vs DDIT (ITAT Mumbai) The issue under consideration is whether addition made on account of Transfer Pricing Adjustment towards interest on debentures invested in the Associated Enterprise (AE) Vital Construction Pvt. Ltd. (VCPL) is justified or not? Assessee, a non-resident company incorporated in Mauritius. Through one of its AEs based in Mauritius […]
Since AO had not considered revised return of income which was filed within prescribed period of limitation for the difference between income disclosed in return and total receipts as per Form 26AS, therefore, the matter was remanded back to AO with direction to verify the fact and grant relief to assessee in accordance with law.
The issue under consideration is whether set off of the ‘unabsorbed depreciation’ can be allowed irrespective of continuity of the business in next year?
