Income Tax : Understand Sections 234A, 234B, 234C, and 234D of the Income Tax Act covering interest on late filing, short payment, delayed adva...
Income Tax : Understand how interest under the Income Tax Act is calculated, including Sections 234A–234D, 244A, and Rule 119A mechanics for ...
Income Tax : Due to any reason, in case the income tax department makes an excess refund to the taxpayer. Such taxpayer will have to return the...
Income Tax : Section 234D in Income Tax Act, 1961 was introduced in the act to cover those situations where the refund was issued to the assess...
Income Tax : The Tribunal allowed deduction of royalty paid for use of a logo, noting that no specific defect was found in the supporting evide...
Income Tax : Tribunal ruled that share transactions cannot be treated as loans without proof of exceptional circumstances. Notional interest ad...
Income Tax : ITAT held that where interest-free funds exceed advances, a presumption arises that such advances are made from own funds. Disallo...
Income Tax : The Tribunal ruled that section 44ADA applies only to specified professions and cannot be invoked for business income covered unde...
Income Tax : Tribunal directed allocation of common head-office expenses (and common income) to eligible industrial undertakings when computing...
It was ruled that deciding appeals based on facts of another year is a serious legal error. The matter was sent back for reconsideration on correct facts.
ITAT Mumbai held that where segmental accounts are not available, then proportionate adjustments have to be made only in respect of the international transactions with associated enterprises [AE]. Thus, TPO directed to compute the transfer pricing [TP] adjustment, restricting it to the international transactions undertaken with associated enterprises.
The case examined whether disallowance under section 14A could be made when no expenditure relating to exempt income was claimed. The Tribunal held that unclaimed expenses cannot be disallowed. The ruling reinforces that section 14A applies only to deductions actually claimed.
The Tribunal held that only unreconciled Form 26AS entries could be taxed while verified reimbursements deserved relief. It also ruled that godown rent already netted in business income could not be taxed again.
Addition of ₹2.28 crore made as long-term capital gains in the hands of the assessee society was deleted in full as amount paid by a developer directly to individual members of a co-operative housing society pursuant to redevelopment cannot be taxed as capital gains in the hands of the society, particularly when the society itself never received the amount.
Delhi High Court held that Dispute Resolution Panel [DRP] cannot merely approve the conclusion of TPO without giving independent findings. Accordingly, writ dismissed as no substantial question arise in the petition.
No on-money addition was made in the cases of other co-owners of the same property. The ITAT held that the Revenue cannot adopt a contradictory stand on identical facts.
The issue was whether demonetisation-era deposits could be taxed despite admitted prior withdrawals. ITAT held that when withdrawals are genuine and the occasion is real, section 69A cannot be applied on presumptions.
The Revenue relied only on the builder’s settlement disclosure to tax the buyer. The ITAT held that third-party admissions, without corroboration or cross-examination, cannot fasten liability on the assessee.
ITAT held that on-money admitted by a seller before the Settlement Commission cannot be presumed against the purchaser without independent evidence. In absence of any seized material or proof of cash payment, the addition u/s 69 was deleted.
