Income Tax : PGBP governs the computation of business and professional income. It defines chargeable income (Sec. 28, 41) including statutory a...
Goods and Services Tax : Learn about the scope of GST on commission income. Understand the invoice test, registration thresholds, and key rulings that clar...
Income Tax : Understand the penalties, interest, and disallowance of expenditure under Section 201 for failure to comply with TDS provisions in...
Income Tax : Understand whether director remuneration is taxed as salary or business income. Learn about tax implications, employer-employee re...
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 : Consistency over technicalities: ITAT Mumbai allowed actuarial pension provision as an ascertained liability, rejected mechanical ...
Service Tax : Extended period of limitation could not be invoked in the absence of fraud, suppression or wilful misstatement with intent to evad...
Custom Duty : The case addressed whether a custodian could be held liable for duty when container contents differed from declared goods. The Tri...
Income Tax : ITAT Bangalore held that interest on bank deposits from operational funds of a co-operative credit society is eligible for deducti...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that omission of taxable foreign exchange gain in the return attracts penalty. It noted that disclosure during a...
ITAT Bangalore ruled that excess stock admitted during a survey is taxed as business income only if a direct nexus to regular business is proven; otherwise, it’s taxed as undisclosed income under Section 115BBE. The verdict split across two assessment years based on whether the disclosure was linked to sales or simply admitted as unexplained.
ITAT Delhi dismissed Revenue’s appeal for AY 2017-18, confirming CIT(A)/NFAC’s deletion of disallowances on fixed deposit interest, bad debts, software expenses, inter-office adjustments, and depreciation on investments. Tribunal relied on consistent precedents, RBI/ICDS guidelines, and prior assessments to uphold the bank’s claims.
The Pune ITAT quashed a Section 263 revision, holding that interest earned by a credit society from deposits in co-operative banks qualifies for the Section 80P deduction as part of business income. The ruling affirms that the AO’s acceptance of the claim, being a plausible view based on precedents, cannot be set aside merely because the PCIT holds a different opinion.
The ITAT ruled that seized parallel Tally data, reflecting higher sales and income, constitutes reliable incriminating material, validating assessments made under Section 153A. The tribunal sustained additions for higher gross profit and unexplained credits after the taxpayer failed to disprove the parallel records’ accuracy, reinforcing the presumption under Section 292C.
The Supreme Court restored the ITAT’s order, ruling that a temporary lull in business due to the absence of a contract does not constitute cessation if the intention and efforts to continue (like correspondence and bidding) exist. The decision allows the non-resident company to claim business expenditure under Section 37(1) and set-off unabsorbed depreciation under Section 32(2).
PGBP governs the computation of business and professional income. It defines chargeable income (Sec. 28, 41) including statutory and deemed receipts, and allows detailed deductions (Sec. 30-37) for operational costs, depreciation, scientific research (Sec. 35), and capital expenditures for specified businesses (Sec. 35AD).
ITAT Jaipur held that surrendered income during survey cannot be treated as unexplained income or money u/s. 69 & 69A of the Income Tax Act and tax in accordance with provisions of section 115BBE. The same has to be assessed to tax under ‘business income’.
The ITAT ruled that interest on enhanced compensation for the compulsory acquisition of agricultural land is fully exempt from income tax, citing Section 96 of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013. The Tribunal held that this special law overrides the general tax provisions (Sections 56 and 145A), deleting the entire Rs.97.44 lakh addition.
The ITAT Pune dismissed the Revenue’s appeal, ruling against additions for ICDS adjustments, provision reversals (including liquidated damages and project costs), and Section 40(a)(ia) disallowance. The Tribunal held that subsequent reversal of provisions cannot be taxed again if the original provision was disallowed in earlier years, thereby preventing double taxation and upholding consistent accounting treatment.
CESTAT Chennai held that DGCEI appointed as officers of Customs and hence authorize to demand differential duty in terms of section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962 during the material period and there was no infirmity in the SCN.
