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 : The ITAT Delhi held that the Revenue could not substitute the assessee's consistent method of revenue recognition with the Percent...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that interest under Section 244A must be computed up to the actual date of refund issuance. Restricting interest...
Income Tax : Adjustment under section 143(1)(a)(iv) based on disallowance reported in Form 3CD was held to be within CPC's jurisdiction. Howeve...
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...
Custom Duty : Stay updated with the latest amendment to the Sea Cargo Manifest and Transhipment Regulations, 2018 by the Central Board of Indire...
Any person being Individual/HUF/Company/Firm/LLP etc. providing any benefit or perquisite whether convertible into money or not, is liable w.e.f. 1-7-2022 to deduct TDS U/s 194R @ 10% on the value or aggregate value of such benefit or perquisite.
Jain Peripherals Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) Section 41 postulates disallowance of cessation of liability for expenditure incurred in trading account earlier. In the present case, disallowance has been made by the AO and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) on the plank that the purchases are not genuine. In our considered opinion, the issue […]
ITAT Delhi decision in ACIT vs. Foot Mart Retail clarifies that liabilities, outstanding for years, not written off, cannot be added under section 41(1). Detailed analysis of the case.
It is settled position of law that merely because credit was outstanding for long time not lead to conclusion that sundry creditors are not payable
AO erred in assessing cessation of liability towards unsecured loans availed from financial institutions in terms of order of BIFR u/s. 41(1) of Income Tax Act, 1961.
It is well settled proposition of law that the apprehension, howsoever strong, cannot substitute material evidences. A.O. was not justified in treating part of liabilities as unproved on presumptions, surmises and conjectures
ISSUE FOR CONSIDERATION When a loan taken for acquiring a depreciable capital asset or a part of the purchase price of such capital asset is waived in a year subsequent to the year of acquisition, an issue that arises with respect to waiver of loan or part of the purchase price is whether the depreciation […]
ITO Vs N.G. Group (ITAT Mumbai) ITAT observed that that AO has invoked the provision of section 41(1) without bringing on record any cogent material. For how long the account is outstanding and on what basis of his enquiry, AO has come to the conclusion that these accounts are not payable. Devoid of these details, […]
Devyani Tex Chem Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Surat) From the above facts it is abundantly clear that books of accounts of the assessee were rejected by the assessing officer and on appeal, ld CIT(A) upheld the rejection of books of accounts and reduced the profit estimation. We also upheld the order of ld CIT(A), […]
DCIT Vs Surbhit Impex Pvt. Ltd (ITAT Mumbai) It is undisputed position that as on the relevant point of time, the proceedings against the assessee for recovery of these amounts were pending before the Hon’ble judicial forums. It was only on 29.01.2018, i.e., which much after the end of the relevant previous year, that Their […]
