Goods and Services Tax : Explore the critical implications of Section 16(4) of the CGST Act, 2017 on taxpayers' Input Tax Credit (ITC) eligibility and the ...
Income Tax : Explore the intricacies of Income Tax Section 41, covering allowances, deductions, and financial transactions. Real-world examples...
Income Tax : Whether Remission Of Trading Liability Separately Taxable Where Income From Business Has Been Declared On Presumptive Basis U/S 44...
Income Tax : Any person being Individual/HUF/Company/Firm/LLP etc. providing any benefit or perquisite whether convertible into money or not, i...
Income Tax : ISSUE FOR CONSIDERATION When a loan taken for acquiring a depreciable capital asset or a part of the purchase price of such capita...
Income Tax : Tribunal held that deduction for bad debts is allowable in the year in which the debts are actually written off in the books of ac...
Income Tax : The ITAT Raipur held that additions for cessation of liability cannot be made merely because creditor confirmations were not filed...
Income Tax : High Court held that consideration received on transfer of self-generated trademarks before 1 April 2002 was not taxable as capita...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that addition under Section 41(1) cannot be made without proof of actual cessation of liability. It found that m...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that mere non-payment or expiry of limitation does not amount to cessation of liability. In absence of actual be...
Custom Duty : Stay updated with the latest amendment to the Sea Cargo Manifest and Transhipment Regulations, 2018 by the Central Board of Indire...
Merely because liability was outstanding, it could not be presumed that the said liabilities had ceased to exist. Since the liability did not cease to exist and the assessee had acknowledged debt in his books, the same could not be taxed under section 41(1).
Alfa Laval India Ltd. case: Difference between the Net Present Value against the future liability credited by the assessee under the capital reserve account in its books of account, is a capital receipt, the addition made on account of the gain on settlement of the sales tax deferred liability not taxable
DCIT Vs. Babcock Borsig Ltd. & Vice-Versa (ITAT Kolkata) Liabilities brought forward from amalgamating company written off by the amalgamated company (assessee) become its Business income- i.e. Profit chargeable to tax under section 41(1) of Income Tax Act, 1961 as the assessee had written off the liabilities after coming to a conscious conclusion that those […]
Section 41(1) provides for taxing any amount benefit which was obtained by a person with respect to any loss, expenditure or trading liability incurred in any earlier Assessment Years. The Section is re-produced as under
Waiver of loan for acquiring capital assets could not be taxed as perquisites under section 28(iv) since receipts were in the nature of cash or money. Section 41(1) of the Income Tax Act does not apply since waiver of loan does not amount to cessation of trading liability. It is a matter of record that the assessee had not claimed any deduction under section 36(1)(iii) of the IT Act qua the payment of interest in any previous year.
Where amount forfeited by assessee against cancellation of booking of flat was subject-matter of civil suit, it could not be said that there was cessation of liability so as to tax such amount as assessee’s income.
Where due to pending disputes with debtors, sales commission could not be paid to agents for longer period, taxation of such liability payable to agents under section 41(1) was not justified.
Section 41(1) of the Act in plain terms provides for adding back of an allowance or deduction which has been made by the assessee in any year in respect of loss expenditure or trading liability and subsequently during any previous year such liability ceases. The primary requirement of applicability of this provision therefore is where an allowance or reduction has been made in the assessment for any year in respect of such loss or expenditure or trading liability. When no such allowance or deduction was made, question of applicability of section 41(1) of the Act would not arise.
(1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 23,04,369 by considering the same to be service tax? (2) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 53,600 made under section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961?
These appeals have been filed against the impugned judgment and order dated 29.01.2003 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in R.A.No.1561 (Bom)/1982 and R.A.No.5161/B/80 whereby the Division Bench of the High Court while giving answers to the Reference Applications filed by the Respondent as well as the Revenue, confirmed certain findings passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (in short ‘the Tribunal’) dated 16.08.1982 in favour of the Respondent
