Premium paid in excess of the face value of the security held under ‘Held to Maturity’ (‘HTM’) category which has been amortised over the period remaining till maturity is allowable – rules Mumbai Tax Tribunal
Whether in computing the deduction under section 80-IA(8), for the purpose of determining the inter divisional notional transfer price, the market price of the power generated should be taken as the price of power purchased from independent power sup
The Tribunal observed that a contribution to approved superannuation fund is deductible in principle as long as the quantum of the said contribution does not exceed the prescribed limits specified in Rule 87 and 88 of the Income-tax Rules. The limi
Frontier Offshore Exploration (India) Limited v. DCIT This decision strengthens the position that special provisions supersede the general provision of the Act for the purpose of withholding tax. It also acknowledges the view that the assessee may withhold tax by suo moto applying the special regime under the provisions of section 44BB.
It is settled law that the dutiability of the final products or inputs, the benefit of cenvat credit in respect of inputs and input services is made available, provided the assessee has necessary documentary evidence and necessary evidence to show utilisation of such input services and in this case, there is no finding that input services were not utilised in providing output services, for which service tax has been paid.
9. This Court in the Tax Appeal No.1367 of 2009 has taken the view that on a conjoint reading of sections 76 and 80 of the Act, it is not possible to envisage a discretion as being vested in the authority to levy a penalty below the minimum prescribed limit. If the authority imposing the penalty is not entitled to levy below the minimum prescrib
The assessee had filed a return of income on 28 November 2000 for assessment year 2001-01 and declared an income of Rs.89.75 crores. On 14 March 2002, the assessee filed a revised return of Rs.80.75 crores. The assessment proceedings commenced on 18 November 2002 with a notice under Section 143(2). The assessment order was passed on 31 March 2003 by which the Assessing Officer determined the income at Rs.97.09 crores under Section 115JA. TDS certificates amounting to Rs. 1,44,34,030/- were submitted during the course of the assessment proceedings. Interest has been allowed to th
Penalty under section 271(1)(c) – Leviability-Expenditure claimed by assessee disallowed by Tribunal-Concealment penalty cannot be imposed merely on the ground that Tribunal disallowed the expenditure claimed by the assessee.
It is pertinent to note that the Central Board of Direct Taxes had issued Circular No. 7/2007 dated 23 July 2007 which provides the procedure and circumstances for refund of tax deducted at source under section 195 of the Act to the tax deductor. How
For the purposes of section 115JB of the Act, the term gloss brought forward’ can only mean losses on the last day of the immediately preceding year and no other meaning can be given to it. In the case of CIT v. Sumi Motherson Innovative Engineerin
