Income Tax : Explore the discussion between CA Micky and CA Mini on Sections 68 & 44AD of the Income Tax Act. Learn about unexplained cash cred...
Income Tax : Understand the impact of Section 43B(h) on businesses: Learn about deductions for MSME payments and the importance of timely payme...
Income Tax : Explore the impact of Finance Act, 2023, on MSME payment enforcement under section 43B(h) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Understand ...
Income Tax : Explore the implications of the recent Income Tax amendment to Section 43B affecting MSMEs. Understand how timely payments are cru...
Income Tax : Explore key income tax compliance requirements for charitable and educational institutions under the Income Tax Act for the assess...
Service Tax : CESTAT Delhi held that granting “call option” is not an activity of rendering service. Thus, appellant has wrongly been held t...
Income Tax : The assessment was completed by Ld. AO u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 determining total income at Rs.2,78,46,98,694/-. CIT...
Corporate Law : Supreme Court held that State Bar Councils (SBCs) cannot charge an enrolment fee or miscellaneous fees above the amount prescribed...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held that when shares are held as investments, there will be no business income and accordingly provisions of section 2...
Custom Duty : CESTAT Delhi held that goods imported are IC-Codecs and are classifiable under Customs Heading 8542 39 90 and hence are exempted f...
The learned counsel for the assessee has vehemently argued that in this case interest from deposit was offered as business income and was also assessed as business income and therefore, automatically once it is assessed as business income then the same becomes eligible for deduction u/s.10B.
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.
As the facts indicate the holding company has advanced funds to the assessee company in 1998 which was received as share application money, later on transferred to unsecured loan. The amounts were utilised in investments and the incomes thereon were offered under the head ‘capital gains’ and not as ‘business income’.
Admittedly, the assessee company was dealing in Cement and also engaged in the business of dealing in shares. There is no dispute over the fact that the assessee had taken delivery of shares before selling them. The assessee company had claimed set off of unabsorbed speculation loss relating to assessment year 1995-96 and 1997-98 carried forward in the current assessment year 2003-04.
19. First we will marshal the facts of the present case. The assessee had availed terms loans from three banks, viz. ICICI Bank Ltd., Standard Chartered Bank Ltd. and Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation (SMBC), Hong Kong. These terms loans were availed by the assessee company for the purpose of acquiring capital assets necessarily to be deployed in the manufacturing system
