BMC Software Asia Pacific Pte Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Pune) The brief facts relating to the issue are that the assessee is a company incorporated under the laws of Singapore and is a tax resident of Singapore, therefore, the assessee is a non-resident from an Indian Income-tax perspective. We note that the assessee declared an […]
Smt. Preeti Rathi Vs ITO (ITAT Pune) The first issue raised herein is against not allowing deduction towards brokerage of Rs.80,000/- paid by the assessee at the time of purchase of the property in the computation of capital gain towards. The claim of the assessee is that she paid a sum of Rs.80,000/- as brokerage […]
Sansthan Shree Eknath Maharaj Vishwastha Mandal Vs ITO (Exemption) (ITAT Pune) There is no dispute on the fact that the assessee filed its return of income on 17.01.2017 for the year under consideration. The approval was granted by the ld. CIT(E) u/s 12AA on 16.05.2017. At this stage, it is relevant to take note of […]
Neilsoft Private Limited Vs DCIT (ITAT Pune) This appeal by the assessee is directed against the final assessment order dated 13-04-2021 passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) r.w.s. 143(3A) & 143(3B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) in relation to the assessment year 2016-17. 2. The only […]
Rena Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. Vs PCIT (ITAT Pune) We find that the issue that a co-operative society would be entitled for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d) on the interest income derived from its investments held with a co-operative bank is covered in favour of the assessee in the following cases: (i) M/s Solitaire […]
If AO, after passing an assessment order, finds something amiss in it to the detriment of the Revenue, he has ample power to either reassess the earlier assessment in terms of section 147 or carry out rectification u/s 154 of the Act. He can’t usurp the power of the CIT and recommend a revision.
DCIT Vs Honeywell Automation India Ltd (ITAT Pune) Conclusion: Interest on income-tax refund amounting to Rs.1.18 crore cannot be charged to tax on the processing of return u/s.143(1) during the year under consideration for the raison d’etre that the regular assessment made in the year 2017 resulted into creation of demand and wiping out the […]
ACIT Vs Atlas Copco (India) Ltd. (ITAT Pune) Admittedly, the appellant had filed the primary details such as name, address, invoice, payment made, etc. However, the assessee could not furnish the confirmations from payees and for want of the confirmations, Assessing Officer made disallowance. The ld.CIT(A) following the decision of his order in the assessee’s […]
Waiver of loan in the earlier year has no impact either on the actual cost u/s 43(1) or the w.d.v. u/s 43(6) for the year under consideration and further section 2(24)(xviii) also does not envelope such waiver within the ambit of `income‘ for the extant year. In that view of the matter, depreciation has to be allowed on the w.d.v. of the block of Machinery at the gross value without reducing the waiver of loan therefrom.
To categorize a particular amount as reimbursement, it is sine-qua-non that the expenditure should be incurred for and on behalf of the other. It envisages two cumulative conditions, viz., first that undiluted benefit flowing from the incurring of the expenditure is passed on, as such, to the other and the second, that the amount incurred is recovered as it is from the other without any plus or minus to that.
