Income Tax : Explore recent Supreme Court rulings (2023) on income tax issues. Highlights of key cases, analysis, and implications....
Income Tax : Section 36 – Other Deductions Section 36 of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1961, provides a list of explicit deductions for computin...
Income Tax : The Delhi High Court, has held in CIT vs. Samara India(P) Ltd. (2013) 216 Taxman 93 , following the decision of Supreme Court in T...
Income Tax : In this discussion, we would take up Section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and analyse the provision therein from all fa...
Income Tax : ection 55 (2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 provides the option to the assesse to consider the fair market value of capital asset...
Income Tax : ITAT held that Accounting Standard-19 governs accounting treatment but does not determine tax treatment under the Income-tax Act. ...
Income Tax : The Bombay High Court held that bad debt deduction cannot be denied where the debt was effectively written off through accounting ...
Income Tax : ITAT Bangalore held that an assessment order passed in the name of an amalgamated bank after it had ceased to exist is void ab ini...
Income Tax : The ITAT held that reassessment initiated beyond four years cannot survive unless the Assessing Officer records that the assessee ...
Income Tax : The Bangalore ITAT held that an assessee need not prove that a debt has actually become irrecoverable to claim a bad debt deductio...
Bombay High Court held that the deduction on account of provision for bad and doubtful debts u/s. 36(1)(viia) of the Income Tax Act is distinct and independent of the provisions of section 36(1)(vii) of the Income Tax Act relating to allowance of the bad debts.
Assessee challenged the disallowance before the Chennai bench of ITAT arguing that the disallowance of Rs. 134.25 crore under Section 14A was excessive and not justified because only Rs. 74.98 lakh had been spent to earn the exempt income.
ITAT Delhi rules against Instronics Limited’s bad debt claim, asserting NBFC loan was merely fund transfer, upholding Rs. 53.11 lakh disallowance.
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(A) dismissed the appeal. Being aggrieved, the present appeal is filed by the appellant.
Kerala High Court held that even after 01.04.2010, Bank would be entitled to the deduction envisaged u/s. 36(1)(viii) of the Income Tax Act in respect of the long term finance provided by it for construction and purchase of houses in India for residential purpose.
Delhi ITAT ruling favors G-Tekt India Pvt. Ltd., allowing deduction for CENVAT Credit written off. Detailed analysis of the case and implications.
In the case of Karur Vysya Bank Ltd. vs. DCIT, ITAT Chennai rejects AO’s disallowance of stale drafts, citing precedent and banking business nature.
Expenditure incurred by assessee should be disallowed to the extent that expenditure which had been incurred for evaluation of business opportunities that could not be said to be in line with the existing business or an extension of the existing business of assessee of manufacturing of paints and enamels.
In a recent decision, ITAT Delhi permits bad debts claimed under section 36(1)(vii) by Oriental Bank of Commerce, setting aside CIT(A)’s order.
ITAT Mumbai held that disallowance made u/s. 14A of the Income Tax Act read with rule 8D deleted as tax free funds were more than investment made on which exempt income was earned.
