Issue before us is as to whether the assessee trust, which is for the sole benefit of an individual, will be entitled to deduction u/s. 54F or not, when its status is that of A.O.P. As per Section 54F the benefits of this section is available to individual or Hindu undivided family (HUF). Hon’ble jurisdictional […]
Reference to DVO for determination of market value for the purpose of computation of capital gains under section 48 would be wholly redundant since main thrust of section 48 is the full value of consideration received or accruing as a result of transfer of capital asset and not the fair market value thereof.
The AO examined the nature of the transactions involving the Assessee and the payments received therefor. The reopening was not based on any fresh material. By revisiting the same materials the successor AO now concluded that the payments received by the Assessee pursuant to the O&M Agreements should be treated as FTS.
1. Research and development services provider could not be compared to a company and Transfer pricing Adjustment are not sustainable. 2. A concern mainly engaged in sale of chemical compounds could not be considered as a right comparable with that of assessee rendering support services in connection with research and development of certain products to an […]
The law in relation to searches under Section 132 of the Act has been explained in a large number of decisions of the Supreme Court and the High Courts. The jurisdictional facts that have to be established before a search under Section 132 (1) of the Act can be authorized are that (i) the authority issuing the authorization is in possession of some credible information, other than surmises and conjectures (ii) that the authority has reason to believe that the conditions stipulated in clauses (a), (b) and (c) of Section 132 (1) qua the person searched exist; and (iii) the said information has nexus to such belief.
They have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. Facts may be noted from Special Civil Application No. 2548 of 2016.
Non-compete fee Incurred by IMPL is a capital expenditure which is in the nature of any other business or commercial rights and hence eligible for depreciation under the provisions of the Act. T
In a recent ruling, the Hyderabad ITAT ruled that non- enclosure of audit report to the return of income would not attract penalty under section 271B of the Income Tax Act.
In Shanders Properties Pvt. Ltd Vs. ITO, the ITAT Bangalore directed the AO to allow the expenditure incurred in relation to issuance of debentures as it constitute revenue expenditure under the provisions of the Income Tax Act.
Under section 145 of the Act, rejection of books of accounts is pre-requisite, where books of accounts have been maintained by the assessee, for making additions by the AO on account of estimation of profit.
