ITAT Mumbai held that deduction under section 54F of the Income Tax Act duly available as nexus between sale of gold jewellery and purchase of flat duly established.
ITAT Mumbai held that assessee furnished the return of income and audit report only after issuance of notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, penalty under section 271B of the Income Tax Act not leviable as failure was due to ignorance and misguidance.
Indofil Industries Limited Vs CIT (ITAT Mumbai) ITAT Mumbai held that assessee is liable to deduct tax at source in respect of commission expenses payable to the whole time directors under section 192 of the Income Tax Act only, as the same shall form part of their salary payment only. Facts- The assessee company is […]
ITAT Mumbai held that merely because some person misused the share market to rig certain shares in the share market, adverse view against innocent regular investor is unjustifiable and unsustainable in law.
PCIT has tried to super impose his view in exercise of powers u/s. 263 of Income Tax Act over one of possible view taken by Assessing Officer.
ITAT Mumbai held that CPC (Centralised Processing Centre) is not authorized to carry out adjustments for disallowance of deduction under section 80P of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Mumbai held that issuance of draft assessment order along with the demand notice is in violation of provisions of section 144C of the Income Tax Act and hence bad in law.
ITAT Mumbai held that the amount spent by the assessee on clinical trials outside the approved in-house facility is eligible for weighted deduction u/s 35(2AB) of the Act.
Section 92C(1) of Act, contemplates that arms length price in relation to an international transaction shall be determined by comparable uncontrolled price method; resale price method; cost plus method; profit split method; transactional net margin method or such other method as may be prescribed by Board.
ITAT Mumbai held that conducting or participating in exhibitions within India or overseas for promotion of Gem and Jewellery Industry couldn’t be regarded as commercial activity for the purpose of proviso to section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act.
