Bureau Veritas-Indian Division Vs ADIT (ITAT Mumbai) Technical expenses allocated by head office to assessee-Indian division was in nature of reimbursement of technical expenses to head office and not on account of any specific technical services having been ‘made available’ and, therefore, such amount could not be brought to tax in hands of assessee under […]
ITO Vs Vishinda Diamonds (ITAT Mumbai) Sister concern made purchases of rough diamonds on behalf of assessee. Sister concern made payment of core service charges to vendor after deducting tax at rate of 15 per cent as per article 13 of the India-UK DTAA. Assessee reimbursed expenses to sister concern. HELD, There was no element […]
CIT Vs Information Architects (Bombay High Court) The amounts paid by the assessee to its employees towards overseas maintenance allowance. These amounts were paid towards expenses at the rate of IEP 50 per day per employee. Held that these amounts constitute only reimbursement for the expenses incurred by the employees at a particular amount per […]
CIT Vs Expeditors International (India) (P.) Ltd. (Delhi High Court) Assessee-company was engaged in business of supplying chain management, logistics and freight forwarding related to movement of goods and cargo within India or outside by road, rail, air or ship – It involved activities of packing, loading/unloading, trucking, tenderization, customs clearance and other cargo handling […]
Convergys Customer Management Group Inc. Vs ADIT (ITAT Delhi) The assessee made payment for link charges to telecom service providers in the USA and cross-charged the portion of the cost incurred by it in connection with the India half link to CIS, which was accordingly reimbursed by CIS to assessee. The assessee has merely procured […]
An agriculturist could not part his agricultural land to a non-agriculturist through a Will and the prohibition against transfers of holding without the previous sanction of the concerned authorities was to be seen in that light as furthering the cause of legislation.
Omni Active Health Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) The issue under consideration is whether the deduction u/s 35(2AB) towards research and development expenditure claimed by assessee is justified in law? In present case, the assessee claimed deduction u/s 35(2AB) being 200% of amount incurred towards scientific research. The perusal of approvals from DSIR in […]
Month is to be interpreted as period of 30 days and not British calendar for levying additional interest u/s 201(1A) for late payment of TDS?
AMP expenditure of assessee did not have a direct bearing on the promotion of brands of its AEs as the issue stood decided in favour of assessee by the decision of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for the preceding assessment years i.e., A.Y. 2007-08 and 2008-09.
The issue under consideration is whether AO is correct in treating unsecured loan received by assessee as unexplained credit under section 68?
