ITAT Mumbai held that deduction u/s 80IB of the Income Tax Act, in respect of increased business income due to addition on account of concealed production, is not allowable.
ITAT Mumbai held that fabrication charges received from Associate Enterprise doesn’t fall under the purview of fees for technical services (FTS) and accordingly not taxable in India.
ITAT Mumbai held that allotment letters issued for purchase of flat should be considered as ‘Agreement to sell’ for the purpose of section 56(2)(x) of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Mumbai held that recording of satisfaction for initiating penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is not in accordance with the provisions of the Act, accordingly, penalty u/s 271(1)(c) not sustained.
ITAT Mumbai held that as there was no malafide or deliberate in action on the part of the assessee in filing the appeal with delay of 387 days before the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, it was directed to CIT(A) to condone the delay.
ITAT Mumbai held that FCCB i.e. Foreign Currency Convertible Bond expenses included as part of FCCB premium expenses is allowable.
ITAT Mumbai held that amendment to section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act vide the Finance (No.2) Act, 2014 is effective from 01/04/2015 and shall be applicable from the Assessment Year 2015-2016.
ITAT Mumbai held that expenses booked upto the date of survey cannot be treated as bogus only for the reason that the expenses were accounted in the books of account subsequent to the date of search.
ITAT Mumbai held that as per first proviso to section 56(2)(vii)(b), where date of agreement fixing amount of consideration for transfer of property and ate of registration is not same, the stamp duty value on the date of allotment is to be taken.
In the case of Amrita Jhaveri Vs DCIT, ITAT Mumbai ruled that non-resident individuals are not required to disclose assets held outside India in their Indian income tax returns. The ITAT quashed the re-assessment order based on vague and general reasons, stating that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment.
