Suraj R. Agrawal

ITAT has Power to grant stay beyond 365 days : Bombay HC

Fema / RBI - Even in case of substituted third proviso to Section 254(2A) of the Act which restricts the power of the ITAT to grant stay beyond 365 days “even if the delay in disposing of the appeal is not attributable to the assessee” has been struck down in Pepsi Foods 376 ITR 87 (Del) as being arbitrary...

Read More

Bogus Purchases: Addition solely based on sales-tax dept. info not sustainable

Fema / RBI - ITAT Mumbai held in the case of Hiralal Chunilal Jain vs. ITO that addition for alleged Bogus Purchase not sustainable as AO had made the addition solely on the basis of information received from the Sales tax department without making any independent inquiry or following the principles of natural justice before making the addition. ...

Read More

CUP method can be applied by a comparing a pricing formulae instead of pricing quantification in amount

Fema / RBI - Pr. CIT vs. Toll Global Forwarding India Pvt Ltd (Delhi High Court) CUP method can be applied by a comparing a pricing formulae, rather than the pricing quantification in amount. Rule 10AB inserted w.e.f. 01.04.2012 is beneficial in nature and so retrospective w.e.f. 01.04.2002...

Read More

Forward contract loss from hedging for foreign exchange fluctuation is allowable deduction

Fema / RBI - ITAT Mumbai has held in the case of ACIT vs. M/s Venus Jewel that Loss on account of forward contract entered into by the assessee to hedge against the loss arising on account of fluctuations in foreign exchange is an allowable deduction....

Read More

Scope of additions that can be made in a pending assessment and in a completed assessment pursuant to a search u/s 132

Fema / RBI - Completed assessments can be interfered with by the AO while making the assessment under Section 153 A only on the basis of some incriminating material unearthed during the course of search or requisition of documents or undisclosed income or property discovered in the course...

Read More
Sorry No Post Found

Transaction approved by RBI & Govt not sufficient & assessee has to benchmark royalty payment separately

Sara Lee TTK Ltd Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) - The assessee did not benchmark the royalty payment separately. On enquiry by the TPO, it relied on RBI approval given in 1995 and also on the fact that the assessee earned a gross profit of 41.6%. TPO applied Press Note 9 (2000 series) and restricted it to 1% on the plea that the payment was for use...

Read More

High pitched assessments: 100% demand stay must be Granted

Dimension Data Asia Pacific Pte Ltd Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) - The Tribunal granted 100 percent stay of demand because (a) the assessed income was more than 10 times the returned income. (Instruction 96 of 1969 was relied upon) & (b) The stand taken by the AO was at variance with the stand taken by TPO....

Read More

Only Payment for ‘offence’ or on what is ‘prohibited by law’ not allowable

Mangal Keshav Securities Limited Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) - Only those payments, which have been made by the assessee for any purpose which is an ‘offence’ or which is ‘prohibited by law’, shall alone would be hit by the explanation to section 37...

Read More

Business set up expenses deductible despite no business business income

Multi Act Realty Enterprises Pvt. Ltd Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) - The assessee may not have been successful in getting customers or earning the business income, but if the assessee has done requisite preparations and if the assessee can be said to be in a position to cater to its customers...

Read More

TP: Turnover is a relevant factor to consider comparability

CIT Vs Pentair Water India Pvt. Ltd (Bombay High Court) - Infosys & Wipro are no doubt large and distinct companies where the area of development of subject services is different and as such the profit earned there from cannot be a bench-marked or equated with the assessee....

Read More
Sorry No Post Found

Recent Posts in "Suraj R. Agrawal"

Transaction approved by RBI & Govt not sufficient & assessee has to benchmark royalty payment separately

Sara Lee TTK Ltd Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai)

The assessee did not benchmark the royalty payment separately. On enquiry by the TPO, it relied on RBI approval given in 1995 and also on the fact that the assessee earned a gross profit of 41.6%. TPO applied Press Note 9 (2000 series) and restricted it to 1% on the plea that the payment was for use of trademark without transfer of techno...

Read More

High pitched assessments: 100% demand stay must be Granted

Dimension Data Asia Pacific Pte Ltd Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai)

The Tribunal granted 100 percent stay of demand because (a) the assessed income was more than 10 times the returned income. (Instruction 96 of 1969 was relied upon) & (b) The stand taken by the AO was at variance with the stand taken by TPO....

Read More

Only Payment for ‘offence’ or on what is ‘prohibited by law’ not allowable

Mangal Keshav Securities Limited Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai)

Only those payments, which have been made by the assessee for any purpose which is an ‘offence’ or which is ‘prohibited by law’, shall alone would be hit by the explanation to section 37...

Read More

Business set up expenses deductible despite no business business income

Multi Act Realty Enterprises Pvt. Ltd Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai)

The assessee may not have been successful in getting customers or earning the business income, but if the assessee has done requisite preparations and if the assessee can be said to be in a position to cater to its customers...

Read More

TP: Turnover is a relevant factor to consider comparability

CIT Vs Pentair Water India Pvt. Ltd (Bombay High Court)

Infosys & Wipro are no doubt large and distinct companies where the area of development of subject services is different and as such the profit earned there from cannot be a bench-marked or equated with the assessee....

Read More

Shares Buyback cannot be equated with capital reduction

Goldman Sachs (India) Securities Pvt. Ltd Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai)

It is open to a company to buy back its own shares by following the procedure prescribed under section 77A/Section 68 or by following the procedure prescribed under section 391 read with Sections 100 to 104 of the 1956, Act....

Read More

Penalty proceedings invalid if notice issued without mind application

Safina Hotels Private Limited Vs CIT (Karnataka High Court)

The notice is issued proposing to levy penalty under Section 271(1) (b) of the Act whereas the order is passed by the Assessing Officer under Section 271(1) (c) of the Act which clearly indicates that there was no application of mind by the Assessing Officer while issuing the notice under Section 274 of the Act....

Read More

Brokerage not deductible in computing Income from house property

Radiant Premises Pvt. Ltd Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai)

The brokerage paid to the third party has nothing to do with the rental income paid by the tenant for enjoying the property to the owner therefore brokerage cannot be said to be a charge that has been created in the property for enjoying the rights and at best it is only an application of income received/receivable from rent...

Read More

S. 153A Assessment in absence of incriminating docs not valid

Ideal Appliances Co. Pvt. Ltd Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai)

Ideal Appliances Co. Pvt. Ltd vs. DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) Although Section 153A does not say that additions should be strictly made on the basis of evidence found in the course of the search, or other post-search material or information available with the AO which can be related to the evidence found...

Read More

Invocation of Section 263 on mere DCIT Suggestion invalid

Span Overseas Ltd Vs CIT (ITAT Pune)

For invoking revisionary powers the Commissioner of Income Tax has to exercise his own discretion and judgment. Here the Commissioner of Income Tax has invoked the provisions of section 263 at the mere suggestion of the Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax...

Read More
Page 1 of 41234

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (3,481)
Company Law (3,399)
Custom Duty (6,603)
DGFT (3,446)
Excise Duty (4,043)
Fema / RBI (3,249)
Finance (3,454)
Income Tax (25,017)
SEBI (2,733)
Service Tax (3,280)

Search Posts by Date

September 2017
M T W T F S S
« Aug    
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930