Income Tax : This covers how business income is computed under the Income-tax Act, including normal and presumptive methods. It explains deduct...
Income Tax : A simple guide to the five heads of income under the Income Tax Act, 1961, explaining salary, house property, business income, cap...
Income Tax : Explains when high-volume, systematic trading is treated as business income and highlights major criteria, tax rates, and complian...
Income Tax : Overview of exemptions and allowances for salaried employees, taxpayers, and businesses under various Income Tax provisions for AY...
Income Tax : A brief study of the tax provisions for Profits and Gains from Business or Profession, covering all chargeable incomes (including ...
Income Tax : From April 1, 2025, rental income from house properties must be reported under "Income from House Property," not as business incom...
Income Tax : The introduction of the Direct Taxes Code (DTC), which will replace the 50-year-old Income Tax Act, will make Foreign Institutiona...
Income Tax : The proposed reduction in corporate tax rate from 30% to 25% in the new direct tax code is only one side of the story. The cut ha...
Income Tax : A Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement was signed between India and Tajikistan today, i.e. 20th November, 2008. The Agreement was s...
Income Tax : The ITAT Mumbai ruled that an AO cannot reclassify rental income as business income if it was consistently assessed as income from...
Income Tax : Delhi High Court confirms arbitral award for Fujitsu's offshore supplies is business income, not taxable in India under Japan-Indi...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai clarifies tax on builders' unsold inventory, stating no deemed rental income on stock-in-trade. Also addresses 80G ded...
Income Tax : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Pune recently ruled that notional rent on unsold flats held as stock-in-trade by a builder ca...
Income Tax : Delhi ITAT allows Shivsagar Builders' appeal, deleting additions for notional rent on inventory and clarifying taxable revenue bas...
Income Tax : Clause (via) in section 28 is inserted by Finance Act, 2018, w.e.f. Financial year 2018-19 and it provides taxation of Inventory i...
Finance : A. P. (DIR Series)CIRCULAR NO03/RBI under Section 195 of the Income Tax Act read with Rule 29B of the IT Rules, any person respons...
With the tax authorities out to prove that the existence of a large number of transactions in shares is to be treated as business income, while the focus of assessees generally has been on trying to refute the tax authorities arguments through stressing the various factual aspects related to the transactions, very often one tends to miss out on exploring the possible alternative contentions, which could mitigate the impact or at times even dissuade the Assessing Officer from treating such transactions as business transactions. What are these contentions?
Special Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. (ITA Nos.87Del//2008, 4788/Del/2007 and 233/Ahd/ 2006) holds that expenditure relating to exempt income to be disallowed even if assessee has not earned any tax-free income.
The definition of Capital asset continues in DTC. However the DTC classifies assets into two broad categories i.e. investment assets, and business assets. DTC envisages taxing income from transfer of investment assets as capital gains. Under the Income Tax Act 1961 (“Act”), income from transfer of capital assets even if used for business purposes was taxed as capital gain. DTC proposes to tax income from transfer of business capital assets as “business income” and the scope of definition of transfer is expanded to include business assets also.
Special Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi holds that expenditure relating to exempt income to be disallowed even if assessee has not earned any tax-free income.
S. 9, Treaty with South Africa; in favor of taxpayer: – Z, a South African company, offered to promote and market the products of the taxpayer, an Indian company, on commission basis. Z will procure and negotiate orders and forward these to the taxpayer. The taxpayer will execute the orders directly and will receive the consideration in India. Z will render all services outside India and will not maintain any PE in India.
S. 80HHC; in favor of taxpayer: Post the amendment by Taxation Law Amendment Act, 2005 (effective from 1 April 1998), controversy had arisen as to whether in case of an exporter having export turnover of more than INR100 million (where generally conditions mentioned in section 80HHC cannot be satisfied), the entire sale proceeds of DEPB need to be excluded while calculating the deduction under Section 80HHC or only profit on transfer of DEPB should be excluded.
S. 271(1)(c); in favor of taxpayer : The taxpayer was a trust organized in the US and was a resident of the US. As regards India, it was registered with SEBI as a sub- account of M/s Fidelity Management Resources Co. It filed a return of income declaring short-term capital gains and dividend income. Thereafter, based on an AAR ruling in case of XZY/ABC Equity Fund (2005) (250 ITR 194), the taxpayer filed a revised return of income,
The taxpayer was a banking company. In the current appeal, the Revenue’s grievance was that the CIT(A) had erred in directing that the written back ”provision of bad-debts” was not taxable as ”business income” especial y when a deduction of a sum was already al owed under Section 36(1) (vi a). The AO in the assessment order held that such write off of the provision for bad and doubtful debts was allowed as deduction in the previous years and therefore the current write back should be taxable. The CIT(A), while deciding the case before him, held that in the absence of any specific provision in the Act, an amount of liability written back cannot be taxed as income.
In the current times where several MNCs are facing the issue of operating losses (the term ‘operating losses’ for the purpose of this article denotes business losses) in various jurisdictions, it becomes imperative for them to evaluate the provisions on utilisation of tax losses in these jurisdictions so as to optimise the overall tax cost. Considering the above, this article contains a broad overview of provisions prevalent in certain key jurisdictions on utilisation of tax losses. However, it should be noted that there could be certain conditions prescribed under the respective tax laws which may need to be followed before offsetting the tax losses.
This article summarizes a recent ruling of the Mumbai Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) [2009-TIOL-707-ITAT-MUM] in the case of Cipla Investments Ltd. (Taxpayer) on taxability of waiver of loan. The ITAT held that since the loan received was on capital account, its subsequent waiver too was on capital account. Hence, the loan waived was not liable to be taxed as profits and gains from its business (business income) under the provisions of the Indian Tax Law (ITL). The ITAT also held that waiver would not be taxable as business income if a taxpayer was not allowed deduction of the loan amount earlier.
