Follow Us:

Judiciary

Applicability TDS charges on pre-paid mobile cellular services provided by a service provider through its distributor’s network

April 30, 2009 5497 Views 0 comment Print

. There is no dispute or dis-agreement regarding the nature of transactions entered into between the assessee and its distributors. The assessee company, by virtue of the licence issued by the Department of Telecommunications, Government of India, is engaged in providing Mobile telephone services to the public at large. The Govt, of India s allotting the licence to various parties in the field on the basis of geographical specifications.

Applicability of provisions of section 194H on post-paid services and pre-paid package

April 30, 2009 547 Views 0 comment Print

25. There is no dispute or dis-agreement regarding the nature of transactions entered into between the assessee and its distributors. The assessee company, by virtue of the licence issued by the Department of Telecommunications, Government of India, is engaged in providing Mobile telephone services to the public at large. The Govt, of India s allotting the licence

Disallowance deduction u/s 80HHC in a case of MAT assessment is to be worked out on the basis of the adjusted books profits under Section 115JA of the Income Tax Act, 1961

April 28, 2009 891 Views 0 comment Print

CIT Vs. M/s K.G. Denim Ltd. (Madras HC) – The Assessing Officer is not entitled to touch the profit and loss account prepared by the assessee as per the provisions contained in the Companies Act, while arriving at the book profit under Section 115J and the book profit so arrived at should be the basis for taxation and therefore, the computation under Section 80HHC should be limited to the case of profits of eligible category only. The Tribunal has also come to the conclusion that in view of the non obstante clause available in Section 115JA it was clear that the provisions is a self-contained one and no other provision would have effect on it and thereby it was to be implemented as contained in the said provision.

YUM! Restaurants (India) Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Income Tax

April 28, 2009 1860 Views 0 comment Print

Assessee-company under the tripartite agreement, in particular, clause 4.1 was under no obligation whatsoever to contribute any money to its wholly owned subsidiary YRMPL. The facts as found also show that whatever was spent by the assessee-company by way of advertisements towards liability to advertisers such as O&M and HTA etc. was allowed. Furthermore, the facts also reveal that the total contributions received during the period by YRMPL was Rs 2.64 crores out of which it had admittedly spent Rs 2.19 crores and the balance Rs 44.44 lacs remained unspent. The point to be noted is that what the assessee-company in law could not have claimed directly, that is, by making a provision for advertising expenditure could it then be allowed to claim an amount as an expense merely on account of the fact that it had set up an intermediary in the form of a wholly owned subsidiary

Merely because an addition is made to the income declared by the assessee, penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) cannot be imposed

April 28, 2009 2721 Views 0 comment Print

In Dharmendra Textile Processors’ case (supra), Their Lordships have held that that penalty under section 271(1)(c) provides remedy for loss of revenue. A penalty under section 271 (1)(c) involves payment of an additional amount, which is a civil liability to provide for remedy for loss of revenue, while a sentence of imprisonment under section 276 C means loss of individual liberty which does not help revenue in anyway except as serving as a deterrent for the potential defaulters.

Agricultural land which is gifted cannot be taxed as income from other sources

April 24, 2009 15440 Views 0 comment Print

It is an admitted fact that the donor had agricultural land in question in her possession and she had been showing agriculture income also from the land. She has been staying with her husband who is a well known architect. For her livelihood, she was not depending on the agriculture land gifted but only on her husband. As long she was not living alone and independent, capacity of her family cannot be ignored.

Commissioner can regard an order as erroneous on the ground that the AO should have made further enquiries

April 24, 2009 669 Views 0 comment Print

2. We have heard the rival submissions in the light of the material placed before us and the precedents relied upon. This appeal is directed against the order passed under section 263 of the Act. The assessee is a company. For the relevant assessment year in the balance sheet of the assessee a provision for gratuity was reflected at Rs.7,85,600/ -. The assessee claimed this as deduction in the return of income

If any payment of income chargeable under the head ‘Salaries’ falls within Section 9(1)(ii) then TDS provisions would stand attracted – SC

April 21, 2009 1657 Views 0 comment Print

The TDS provisions in Chapter XVII-B relating to payment of income chargeable under the head Salaries, which are in the nature of machinery provisions to enable collection and recovery of tax forms an integrated Code with the charging and computation provisions under the 1961 Act, which determines the assessability/taxability of salaries in the hands of the employee-assessee. Consequently, Section 192(1) has to be read with Section 9(1)(ii) read with the Explanation thereto. Therefore, if any payment of income chargeable under the head Salaries falls within Section 9(1)(ii) then TDS provisions would stand attracted.

Delhi High Court decision regarding applicability of service tax on rent

April 18, 2009 5769 Views 4 comments Print

The Delhi High Court held that the renting of immovable property is not a service, and accordingly, the levy of service tax on the activity of renting is “ultra vires.” The decision may have significant accounting implications on the entities. The judgment delivered by the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court

Sum due u/s 434 of the Companies Act, must mean what has fructified and can not merely be a contingent liability or deferred payment

April 17, 2009 7395 Views 0 comment Print

The sum due as referred to under section 434 of the Companies Act, 1956 must mean what has fructified and can not merely be a contingent liability or deferred payment; if the liability has not fructified within 21 days from the time the date of service of notice, it cannot be said to be a debt which company is unable to pay, in order that the Court could find a justification for winding up the company.

Search Post by Date
June 2026
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930