Knorr-Bremse India Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT (P&H HC) A reading of the orders of the TPO, the DRP and of the Tribunal makes it clear that one of the main reasons for not accepting the assessee’s case was that the assessee had not been able to substantiate that the payment for the services had actually increased its profits.
ITAT Delhi held In the case of DCIT vs. M/s. Spice Retail Ltd. that the expenditure incurred by the assessee on advertisement has been treated as revenue in nature. It is not open for the AO to treat an expenditure as party revenue in nature and balance 25% as deferred revenue expenditure.
ITAT Mumbai held In the case of M/s. National Pharmaceuticals vs. ITO that there is no straight jacket formula can be applied to check sufficient reasons for late filing of appeal. It will depend on the facts and circumstances of the particular case.
ITAT Delhi held In the case of M/s SRK Education & Research Charitable Trust vs. CIT that it is clear in this case that the CIT refused to grant the trust registration because there was no dissolution clause in the trust deed and also the assessee had not done any charitable activity.
ITAT Mumbai held In the case of The ACIT vs. M/s Sandeep Shrivastava that AO is not authorized to make any addition merely on account of presumption. In this case because the assessee is Share holder and Director of the company, which sold the property
ITAT Lucknow held In the case of M/s Clara Swain Hospital vs. ITO that no capital gain liability can be imposed on the assessee where he does not own the asset and more ever he has not received any payment for such transfer.
The ITAT Ahmedabad in the case of Ranpariya Solanki Sukhadiya Parivar Trust vs. CIT(Exemption) held that the application made u/s 12AA cannot be rejected even a trust’s object is to function in the interest of a particular community
ITAT Amritsar held In the case of M/s. Pardeep Singh Wazir vs. The DCIT that Circular no. 1/2009, dated 27th March, 2009 issued by CBDT is effective from 01/04/2009 i.e. for the assessment year 2009-10 onwards.
ITAT Delhi held In the case of Jaipal Singh Sharma Trust vs. CIT that it is well settled that at the stage of grant of registration, the non-commencement of the activities by the Trust cannot be a ground for refusal of registration u/s 12AA.
ITAT Ahmadabad held In the case of Adani Port & Special Economic Zone Ltd. vs. ACIT that two circumstances must exist to enable the Commissioner to exercise power of revision u/s 263, namely (i) the order is erroneous
