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...
ITAT Mumbai held that deeming fiction of section 50C cannot be extended while working out the written down value [WDV] for the purpose of claiming depreciation on the block of asset. In other words, legal fiction for substantiating the sale consideration by the Stamp Duty Value created under either section 50 or section 43CA cannot be extended to section 32 for claiming depreciation on the block of the asset. Thus, order set aside.
Assessees were qualified as companies owning an industrial undertaking within the meaning of Section 72A. Accordingly, the carry forward and set-off of accumulated business losses and unabsorbed depreciation of the amalgamating transport corporations was allowable.
Taxing a debenture waiver as revenue income was challenged. The Tribunal rejected the approach, holding the waiver arose from capital financing and not trading operations. The ruling confirms that capital restructuring gains are not taxable by default.
The Supreme Court held that a suit for mandatory injunction is not maintainable where title, possession, and identity of land are seriously disputed. In such cases, the proper remedy is a suit for possession or declaration, not injunction alone.
The court held that valid registration under income-tax law is a relevant factor under FCRA and cannot be ignored. Failure to consider it violated Section 52, which makes FCRA supplementary to other laws.
The Tribunal ruled that a creditor’s write-off alone cannot trigger section 41(1) taxation. The assessee’s liability persisted in its books, and the ₹10.23 crore addition was deleted.
The Tribunal examined whether GST could be included in gross receipts for presumptive income. It held that GST is a statutory levy with no income element and must be excluded under section 44BB.
ITAT Delhi held that a loan used to repay a bank cannot be treated as a trading liability under section 41(1). Since no deduction was claimed earlier and no write-back occurred, the addition of ₹8.22 crore was rightly deleted.
ITAT Jaipur held that withdrawing approval under section 10(23C)(vi) of the Income Tax Act not justified in absence of any corroborative evidence of personal benefit of trustees and misuse of funds. Accordingly, appeal allowed and registration u/s. 10(23C)(vi) restored.
The Tribunal held that Section 69 additions based solely on pen-drive data and an employee’s statement from a third-party search could not be sustained. No corroboration or confrontation to the assessee was provided. The ruling confirms that unsupported electronic data cannot create taxable on-money additions.
