Income Tax : Supreme Court clarifies Section 80HHC deduction for Export-Oriented Units, emphasizing that profits eligible for deduction must be...
Income Tax : In the last quarter of the financial year 2000-0 1, a serious controversy arose in the Income-Tax Department and export circles of...
Income Tax : In the present case, according to the Finance Minister presenting the Bill, a valid piece of legislation has been wrongly interpre...
Income Tax : The Madras High Court held that taxable income was not properly computed where deduction under Section 80IB was reduced before cal...
Income Tax : The court examined whether reassessment could be initiated after four years based on existing records. It held that reopening foun...
Income Tax : The issue was whether reassessment could be initiated after four years without fresh evidence. The court held such reopening inval...
Income Tax : The court held that electricity tariff for determining market value must include all components, including duty. It ruled that exc...
Income Tax : ITAT Bangalore held that interest on bank deposits from operational funds of a co-operative credit society is eligible for deducti...
The Madras High Court held that taxable income was not properly computed where deduction under Section 80IB was reduced before calculating Section 80HHC relief. The matter was remanded for fresh assessment in line with the Supreme Court ruling in Shital Fibers Ltd.
The court examined whether reassessment could be initiated after four years based on existing records. It held that reopening founded on a change of opinion is impermissible, and such reassessment was quashed. The ruling reinforces limits on reassessment powers.
The issue was whether reassessment could be initiated after four years without fresh evidence. The court held such reopening invalid when based on existing records and no failure of disclosure.
The court held that electricity tariff for determining market value must include all components, including duty. It ruled that excluding such elements artificially reduces eligible deduction.
ITAT Bangalore held that interest on bank deposits from operational funds of a co-operative credit society is eligible for deduction u/s 80P, as it is attributable to business activity; reliance on Totgars was held inapplicable.
Tribunal directed allocation of common head-office expenses (and common income) to eligible industrial undertakings when computing deductions under sections 10B and 80-IB, following prior coordinate-bench rulings; AO must apply the earlier directions on remand. Key takeaway: common corporate overheads and income were to be apportioned to units for deduction-computation as previously directed.
The High Court ruled that sales tax exemption retained by an industrial unit was capital in nature because it was granted to encourage investment in backward areas. As a result, the subsidy could not be treated as taxable revenue.
The Court held that losses already set off in earlier years cannot be notionally carried forward for computing deduction under Section 80IA. The ruling follows binding precedent restricting retrospective reworking of absorbed losses.
ITAT Bangalore held that at the relevant time co-founder of Flipkart stayed in India for 141 days and balance days in other countries. Hence, assessee is an Indian national and thus the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.
The tribunal held that revision under Section 263 is invalid where the Assessing Officer has examined the issue and adopted a plausible legal view. The PCIT cannot substitute his opinion merely because another interpretation is possible.
