Where property held by assessee was encumbered and, thus, she was not absolute owner of property, while computing capital gain arising from transfer of such a property, market value of property as taken for purpose of payment of stamp duty could not be adopted as sale consideration by applying provisions of section 50C.
DCIT Vs Morgan Stanley (I) Capital (P) Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai) Conclusion: Where there was any shortfall due to any difference of opinion as to taxability of any item or nature of payments falling under various TDS provisions, assessee could be declared to be an assessee-in- default under section 201, however, no disallowance could be made […]
Income derived by assessee from leave and licence fee was to be treated as income from house property not as business income as assessee company’s primary object was not to construct, develop and lease property out for earning rental income but to engage itself as real estate developer.
Assessee was not entitled to claim exemption from capital gains on transfer of rural agricultural land as State Government had notified the said land for establishing industrial park and consequently, the land had become non-agricultural urban land.
Framing of an assessment against a non-existent amalgamating entity was not procedural irregularity but a jurisdictional defect not covered under section 292B, therefore, assessment made by AO was nullity in the eyes of law and the same was liable to be quashed.
In present case there are evidences and material to show that the shareholder company was only a paper company having no source of income, but had made substantial and huge investment in the form of share application money.
Ms CLSA India Private Limited Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) ITAT Mumbai held that AD-Hoc Determination of Arm’s Length ALP) Price By Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) Not Sustainable in Law. FACTS – Assessee is a subsidiary of Credit Lyonnais Securities Asia, Netherland. Return of assessee was selected for scrutiny and international transaction with its associated enterprise […]
RBM Pati Joint Venture Vs DDIT (ITAT Delhi) An insight over the penalty order, we find that the penalty was initiated on account of loss claimed by the appellant on sale of assets, even though, that particular block of assets had not been exhausted. We do not find any justification to discard the findings reached […]
Commissioner of Value Added Tax Vs Otis Elevator Company (India) Ltd. (Delhi High Court) The placement of an order by the agent for procurement of the lifts, in this case, was merely an offer. It is only upon its acceptance and further steps taken by the supplier that an offer crystallizes into a binding promise […]
In re Rajasthan Rajya Sahakari Kriya Vikriya Sangh Ltd (GST AAR Rajasthan) 1. Whether the applicant is liable for charging goods and service tax under the RGST Act, 2017 and CGST Act, 2017 on providing service for procurement of agricultural produce i.e. oilseeds and pulses from farmers either itself or through Kray Vikray Sahakari Samiti […]
