Income Tax : Summary of Section 40A disallowances, including payments to related parties, cash payments, gratuity provisions, non-statutory fun...
Income Tax : Understand nuances of claiming tax deductions on payments to relatives in business. Learn how Section 40A(2) of Income Tax Act, 19...
Income Tax : The issue under consideration in this write up is whether disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia), 40A & 43B of Income Tax Act, 1961 are at...
Income Tax : Introduction Section 40A(2) of Income Tax Act, 1961 deals with payments to relatives and associated persons. It provides that wher...
Income Tax : The ITAT held that the Assessing Officer wrongly compared dissimilar email marketing services to determine excess payment. The rul...
Income Tax : The Tribunal reversed additions made towards alleged suppressed rent and bogus salary expenses. It emphasized factual consistency,...
Income Tax : The issue was whether revision under section 263 could be invoked when the Assessing Officer had accepted a legally possible view....
Income Tax : The tribunal held that where the Assessing Officer conducted exhaustive enquiries and applied his mind in a 153C assessment, revis...
Income Tax : Restoring the Assessing Officer’s findings, the Tribunal ruled that excessive salary to related directors can be disallowed when...
Income Tax : Notification No. 8/2020-Income-Tax- CBDT has notified Other electronic modes by inserting New Income TAx Rule 6ABBA. It also amend...
It was held that loan taken from the relatives cannot be compared with bank loan because loan from the relatives are without security, while loan from the bank is secured. Tribunal has held in the case of Omkarmal Gaurishanker –Vs- ITO reported in 92 TTJ (Ahd.) 223 that interest paid to relatives @24% is reasonable.
CIT(A) found force in the submission of the assessee that the interest at the rate of 12% was also taken as reasonable in the Income Tax Act under the provisions of section 40A(b)(iv) for the purpose of calculating interest to the partners. The CIT(A) also followed the decision of the Tribunal in the case of ACIT Vs. M/s.Raj Steel Industries and Vipul Y. Mehta Vs. ACIT (supra) where the rate of interest at 18% to 24% was considered to be reasonable.
We have heard both the parties and perused the material placed before us. We find that during the year under consideration, the assessee claimed travelling expenses amounting to Rs.4,29,01 1/-. The AO disallowed 50% of the claim because the expenses included the expenses of assessee’ s wife also.
