ITAT Mumbai held that penalty under section 270A of the Income Tax Act unsustainable as non-declaration of interest on income tax refund was bona fide and cannot be said to be underreporting of income.
Explore Gerah Enterprises P. Ltd. Vs. PCIT case where order under Section 263 was quashed for violating CBDT Circular No. 19/2019.
ITAT Mumbai held that there was no express arrangement / agreement between the assessee and the AE for incurring advertisement, marketing and promotional expenses (AMP) to promote the brand of the AE and hence the said transactions would not constitute international transaction relating to AMP expenditure. Thus, TP adjustment deleted.
ITAT Mumbai held that in case municipal tax receipts are in name of land lord and ownership of flats are with society and taxes are borne by the society and collects proportionate taxes from flat owner. Then, municipal tax so paid is allowable as expenditure u/s 24 of the Income Tax Act.
Held that the transfer pricing provisions are not applicable to the assessee to the extent of operations carried out through operating qualifying ships where the income is taxed under Tonnage Tax Scheme.
ITAT Mumbai held that the assessee had furnished sufficient evidences to justify the genuineness of the payments and therefore their mere non-attendance of summons, cannot be reason enough to disbelieve the genuineness of the transactions with them. Accordingly, addition u/s. 69C deleted.
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.
