ITAT Judgments - Page 10

Section 269SS not applies to Cash Transaction between Close Family Members for giving support & help

Sri Nikhil Banik Mazumder Vs. JCIT (ITAT Kolkata)

To support the family members, the money has been given by the assessee to his son/wife. This is simply a transfer of money from one family member to another family member to support day to day expenses, educational expenses and other family expenses...

Read More

Cessation of liability U/s. 41(1) cannot be presumed, merely because liability remained unpaid for a period of 3 years

ITO Vs. Thadaram Khaldas Tolani (ITAT Mumbai)

Merely on the reasoning that liability in respect of some of the sundry creditors have remained outstanding for about three years the assessing officer has concluded that they have to be treated as income of the assessee in the impugned assessment year as they have ceased to exist as per section 41(1) of the Act. ...

Read More

Sec. 54 Cost of residential house includes cost of furniture if it forms part of house Purchase

Rajat B Mehta Vs. ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad)

It could not have been open to the authorities below to treat the payment of Rs 18,00,000 on account of furniture and fixtures on standalone basis, and thus exclude it as a separate item rather than as a cost of the residential house so purchased. In our considered view, therefore, the assessee is entitled to deduction under section 54F ...

Read More

Section 41(1) includes remission or cessation of any liability by a unilateral act

DCIT vs Sonodyne Television Co. Ltd.(ITAT Kolkata)

Loss or expenditure or some benefit in respect of any such trading liability by way of remission or cessation shall be includible by a unilateral act by the first person who is assessee, i.e., debtor. There is no stipulation of such unilateral act by the creditor. ...

Read More

ITAT not levied penalty on CA Firm for not paying FBT on traveling & conveyance Expenses of Articled Clerks

M/s. Gujrani & Co. Vs. ITO (ITAT Kolkata)

M/s. Gujrani & Co. Vs. Income Tax Officer (ITAT Kolkata) It is observed that the audit expenses of Rs. 5,19,238/- were claimed to be incurred by the assessee- company towards traveling and conveyance of the Articled Clerks, who were C.A. students receiving training from the assessee- firm. It was contended by the assessee during the [...

Read More

Fees for use of Software is revenue in nature and allowable U/s. 37

D.C.I.T. Vs G.E. Capital Business Process Management Services Pvt. Ltd (ITAT Delhi)

License fee, Connectivity charges and co-ordination charges paid to a US based company GE Capital Corporation for use of 'Vision Plus' software held to be revenue in nature and allowable under section 37...

Read More

Non compete fee is not an eligible intangible asset for depreciation U/s. 32

DCIT Vs. EAC Industrial Ingredients India P. Ltd (ITAT Delhi)

Non compete fee is not an eligible intangible asset as the words similar business or commercial rights have to necessary result in an intangible asset against the entire word which can be asserted as such to qualify for depreciation u/s 32(1)(ii) of the Act which non compete fees lacks...

Read More

Interest u/s 234B / 234C payable on failure to pay advance tax on AMT/MAT

M/s GIE Jewels Vs. Income Tax officer (ITAT Jaipur)

A bench comprising Vijay Pal Rao (JM) and Vikram Singh Yadav (AM) of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) recently declared that Interest u/s 234B of the Income Tax Act can be levied on ground of non-payment of advance tax in respect of Alternative Minimum Tax. ...

Read More

No disallowance for monetary benefits given to doctors before 01.08.2012

Income-tax Officer Vs. Sunflower Pharmacy (ITAT Ahemdabad)

A.O. disallowed the payment of commission made by the assessee to the above said two doctors namely (i) Dr. Ramanbhai S. Patel Rs. 17,52,130/- and (ii) Dr. Ratilal G. Patel Rs. 23,87,001/- totaling to Rs. 41,39,131/- and added to the total income u/s. 37(1) of the Act....

Read More

S.68 Addition cannot be made merely because Investor Company was from Kolkata

ACIT Vs. TRN Energy Pvt. Ltd (ITAT Delhi)

Share application money cannot be treated as unexplained credit if the AO does not make any investigation on the documentary evidences filed by the assessee or ask for the production of the investors for examination u/s 131 or if adverse material is found during search to prove that share application money is bogus or an arranged affair o...

Read More
Page 10 of 488« First...89101112...203040...Last »

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (3,623)
Company Law (3,666)
Custom Duty (6,806)
DGFT (3,581)
Excise Duty (4,096)
Fema / RBI (3,378)
Finance (3,613)
Income Tax (26,535)
SEBI (2,807)
Service Tax (3,320)

Search Posts by Date

March 2018
« Feb