|
Advanced Search Options
Income Tax - Case Laws
Showing 81 to 100 of 385 Records
-
2011 (8) TMI 1230 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Non occupancy charges - transfer fees / betterment charges - principle of mutuality - assess the rental income for letting out the terrace under the head income from house property subject to deduction u/s.24
-
2011 (8) TMI 1229 - ITAT MUMBAI
Income received on lease of a portion of terrace of the building and a wall of the building for the purpose of fixing of hoarding, neon sign, etc. - assessable under the head “Income From Business or Profession” or under the head “Income From Other Sources” - Held that:- Allow this ground raised by the assessee directing the Assessing Officer to assess the income in question under the head “Income From House Property”.
-
2011 (8) TMI 1227 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... the order of AO. 6. On the other hand, the ld. Counsel of the assessee relied on the order of ld. CIT (Appeals). 7. After considering the submissions and perusing the material on record, we find that ld. CIT (A) was justified in allowing the issue in favour of the assessee. The issue is squarely covered by the decision of ITAT Jodhpur in the case of Navneet K. Thakar (supra). There was no stamp duty imposed in this case as the land in question was transferred through unregistered sale deed. The amendment in section 50C came into force with effect from 1.10.2009 which is not applicable for the year under consideration as the year under consideration is 2006-07. Therefore, for this reason also the issue allowed by ld. CIT (A) in favour of assessee is justified. The finding of ld. CIT (A) remained uncontroverted, therefore, we confirm the finding of ld. CIT (A). 8. In the result, appeal of the department is dismissed. 9. The order is pronounced in the open court on 05.08.2011.
-
2011 (8) TMI 1226 - ITAT CUTTACK
... ...
... ... ..... n the subsequent year on deposit of defaulted TDS. In other words, the provisions of Section 194C had to be invoked first for considering the deeming provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) therefore settles the issue in Chapter XVII itself, which has been accepted by the assessee not to be further considered for disallowance on the interpretation of the provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) and that too u/s.147/148. Therefore, the learned CIT(A) misdirected himself to consider the nature of accounting entries requiring such deduction of tax at source which had already been adjudicated upon by the Assessing Officer of TDS Circle. The amount of disallowance of ₹2,75,00,000 is therefore unjustified and without any basis. For the reasons aforesaid, we set aside the impugned order of the learned CIT(A) and direct the addition of ₹2,75,00,000 made on this account to be deleted. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON Dt. 5th AUGUST, 2011
-
2011 (8) TMI 1225 - ITAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... s the order of the AO and the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (A). 23. Having carefully heard the submissions of the rival parties and perusing the material available on record we find merit in the plea of the learned counsel for the assessee that the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in Ekta Promotors (P) Ltd (supra), wherein it has been held that section 234D which has been brought on the statute w.e.f. 1.6.2003 cannot be applied to the assessment year 2003-04 or earlier years, but it will have application only with effect from assessment year 2004-05. Respectfully following the same, we hold that the AO was not justified in levying the interest under section 234D of the Act and accordingly the same is deleted. The ground taken by the assessee is therefore allowed. 24. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 10th August, 2011.
-
2011 (8) TMI 1224 - ITAT VIZAG
... ...
... ... ..... ldquo;IMD Bonds”. There cannot be any doubt that “IMD bonds” falls in the category of “Securities”. Hence the receipt of securities without adequate consideration, i.e. Gifts in kind, is subjected to tax, only if it is received only on or after 1.10.2009. In the instant case, the impugned IMD amount has been received by the assessee prior to 1.10.2009. Hence, the provisions of section 56(2)(v), which was invoked by Ld. CIT is not applicable to the impugned transaction. We notice that similar view has been expressed by Mumbai Bench of ITAT in the case of Anuj Agarwal, supra. Hence, the directions issued by Ld. CIT to tad the receipt of IMD Bonds u/s 56(2)(v) of the Act in the instant case do not have legal sanctity and accordingly the said direction is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order of the Ld. CIT on this issue. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Pronounced in the open Court on 11.8.2011
-
2011 (8) TMI 1223 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
... ...
... ... ..... s "regular books of accounts". 26. On the other hand, the Counsel of the assessee, appearing on behalf of the assessee, vehemently supported the order of the ld. CIT(A). 27. Having heard both the sides, we have carefully gone through the orders of the authorities below. It is pertinent to note that Shri Chitharbhai died on 01.01.2005. The figures mentioned on the loose paper are without any description at all i.e., no name of any party mentioned. All these written figures are naked and cannot be ascertained whether it pertained to amount or quantity or whether it is a receipt or expenditure. It does not bear the name of the assessee or any other party. These, being the facts, the ld. CIT(A) is legally and factually correct in deleting this addition. We, therefore, incline to uphold the order of the ld. CIT(A). This ground of appeal is rejected. 28. In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed. The Order pronounced in the Open Court on 26.08.2011
-
2011 (8) TMI 1221 - ITAT CHENNAI
Nature of receipt - Membership fee received from the members was treated as revenue receipt liable to tax
-
2011 (8) TMI 1220 - ITAT PUNE
... ...
... ... ..... the order of the Commissioner of Incometax (Appeals). As stated above, the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Kirloskar Ferros Industries Ltd. (supra) has approved the view of the Pune Bench of the Tribunal taken in the case of Kirloskar Engines Ltd. In ITA No 1039 & 1040/PN/2000 for the assessment years 1995-96 and 1996-97 that in case of a limited company ad hoc disallowance out of expenditure incurred on telephone, vehicle etc., which are certified by the auditor of the Company as also the auditors under the Income Tax Act cannot be made. On the parity of reasoning, we find no justification for the ad hoc disallowance made lby the Assessing Officer out of legal and professional expense. In this view of the matter, we affirm the decision of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) on this aspect. Revenue fails on this Ground. 31. In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed. Decision pronounced in the open court on this 30th day of August, 2011.
-
2011 (8) TMI 1219 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
... ...
... ... ..... ), it is clear that the book results declared by the assessee shall have to be accepted. Therefore, there is no reason for the learned CIT(A) to maintain even part addition on this issue. The finding of facts recorded by the learned CIT(A) have not been rebutted through any material on record. We, therefore, confirm the findings of the learned CIT(A) with regard to the acceptance of the book results. However, the part addition sustained by the learned CIT(A) in a sum of ₹ 5,00,000/- is set aside and the part addition maintained by him is also deleted by setting aside the order of the learned CIT(A) to that extent. In the result, the departmental appeal on ground No.1 is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee on ground No.1 and 2 is allowed.” In view of the above, we confirm the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) and dismiss the ground raised by the Revenue. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. Order was pronounced in open Court on 5/8/11.
-
2011 (8) TMI 1218 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... d disallowance of expenses on estimation basis were not found to be false or fabricated by the Assessing Officer. The disallowances were made only on technical point which was highly disputable as to decide the issue. The special bench of the Tribunal was required to be constituted. It was further observed that bad debts claimed by the assessee were not found to be bogus. It was further observed that the expenses claimed also were not found to be bogus or inflated. The disallowances were made on the basis of the facts and figures furnished by the assessee. 6. In view of the facts noted by the Tribunal and the conclusions arrived at, we do not find any reason to interfere when it is found that the assessee had made full disclosures and made claims which though were ultimately disallowed, were not found to be bogus and when it is found that the issue was highly debatable, the order deleting the penalty is not required to be interfered with. Tax Appeal is, therefore, dismissed.
-
2011 (8) TMI 1217 - ITAT AGRA
... ...
... ... ..... val merely because one particular expenditure is for an activity, which may be termed as spending for a particular religion. We find that in this case, no object is of religious nature. The expenditure has not been incurred on any rituals, but on spreading the moral values propounded by Shree Ram, to which we have adverted earlier. These values are of social use and do not have any religious contents. While some Hindus may consider Shree Ram to be god, others may consider him to be only a great person, who followed certain social values required to bring peace and harmony amongst people. Accordingly, we are of the view that the expenditure was not incurred for religious purpose and it was for charitable purpose. Therefore, it is held that the ld. CIT erred in not granting approval u/s. 80G. Accordingly, she is directed to grant the approval on the basis of application dated 24.03.2009. 5. In the result, the appeal is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 16.08.2011.
-
2011 (8) TMI 1216 - ITAT PUNE
Income arising from transfer of shares as “Income from Capital Gains” instead of as “Income from Business & Profession” - Held that:- CIT(A) has rightly come to the conclusion that the transactions in question are investment in nature and therefore, income from sale of the shares of the 3 companies made during the year requires to be taxed as income under the head “capital gains”.
-
2011 (8) TMI 1215 - ITAT DELHI
Unexplained cash deposits - CIT (Appeals) correctly deleting the addition on the basis of additional evidence admitted and after proper verification of the same. CIT (Appeals) has himself has verified the evidence and has recorded a finding of fact that the source of deposit in the bank account has been explained by the assessee with the help of books of accounts and bank account of proprietorship concerns. Under such circumstances no purpose will be served by remitting back the matter to the assessing officer when the ld. CIT (Appeals) has himself had verified the evidence and recorded a finding of fact that the source of deposit was duly verified. Merely because the assessing officer had objected would not be a ground for remitting the case back to the assessing officer particularly when the matter has been examined and decided by the ld. CIT (Appeals).
-
2011 (8) TMI 1214 - ITAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... ion 80HHC. An assessee may well be entitled to a deduction in respect of the expenditure laid out wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business in the computation of the profits and gains of business or profession. However, for the purposes of computing the deduction under section 80HHC, the provisions which have been enacted by Parliament would have to be complied with. A deduction in excess of what is mandated by Parliament cannot be allowed on the theory that it is an incentive provision intended to encourage export. The extent of the deduction and the conditions subject to which the deduction should be granted, are matters for Parliament to legislate upon. Parliament having legislated, it would not be open to the court to deviate from the provisions which have been enacted in section 80HHC”. Accordingly, this issue is decided against the assessee. 13. In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed. Order pronounced on the 12th, day of Aug 2011.
-
2011 (8) TMI 1213 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
... ...
... ... ..... d packing material in respect of excise duty component as has been done by the A.O. in the present case. But if the assessee is followings the 2nd method of accounting i.e. net basis, then no actual addition is required to be made because if we make addition of excise duty component in the value of closing stock of raw material and packing material, corresponding deduction has to be allowed by including such excise duty component in the value of purchases debited in the P & L account. Accordingly, we modify the direction of the Ld. CIT(A) and the A.O. is directed to decide this issue in the light of above discussion and he should pass necessary order as per law after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. In the result, grounds No.2 & 3 of the assessee’ appeal, are allowed for statistical purposes. 17. In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed in terms indicated above. 18. Order pronounced in the open court on 05th Aug., 2011.
-
2011 (8) TMI 1212 - ITAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... ort, as is submitted by the assessee in support of the purchase price, can be simply brushed aside. We are unable to see any merits in the action of the Assessing Officer. The transfer pricing regulations and the provisions under section 40A(2), which have been referred to in the grounds of appeal, have no application to the facts of this case either. In our considered view, learned CIT(A) was fully justified in deleting the impugned disallowance of interest, and his order does not call for any interference. 9. Ground Nos.1 to 3 is thus dismissed”. Since the facts and the controversy in the present appeal are identical, respectfully following the order of the Tribunal cited above, we uphold the decision of the CIT(A) deleting the disallowance of the interest and dismiss the appeal filed by the department. 7. To sum up, the assessee’s appeal is allowed and the department’s appeal is dismissed. No costs. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 12th August 2011.
-
2011 (8) TMI 1211 - ITAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... the section did not cover profit from a source beyond the first degree, thus making it clear that any incidental business income or income attributable to business has to be excluded. The rent and interest income is only incidental business income and is not profit from the eligible business of the undertaking and, therefore, deduction under section 80IB cannot be allowed in respect of these items. However, income from sales tax set off, excise duty re-fund, sundry balance written off has arisen from the business operations of the undertaking and, therefore, in our view such income has to be considered for deduction under section 80IB. We, therefore, hold that the deduction under section 80 IB will not be allowed in respect of interest and rental income but the same is allowable in respect of other items of income under consideration. 5. In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of the order above order. Order pronounced in the open court on 24.8.2011.
-
2011 (8) TMI 1210 - ITAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... aken by the Revenue are rejected. ITA No. 4719/Mum/2010 (AY-1999-2000) 6. At the time of hearing, both the parties have agreed that the facts of this case and the facts of the case for the assessment year 1998-99 are identical, therefore, the plea taken by them for the said assessment year may be considered while deciding the present appeal. 7. Having carefully heard the submissions of the rival parties and perusing the material available on record and in the absence of any contrary material placed on record by the Revenue, we following of our findings recorded in paragraph 5 of this order uphold the findings of the ld. CIT(A) in directing the AO to allow the interest under section 244A on the entire refund amount so determined after allowing MAT credit to the appellant company subject to verification. Accordingly, the grounds taken by the Revenue are rejected. 8. In the result, the Revenue’s Appeals stand dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 30th Aug.2011.
-
2011 (8) TMI 1209 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Addition while computing the book profit u/s.115JB on account of provision for doubtful debts - Held that:- It is not in dispute that the assessee had made the provisions for doubtful debt. In fact the assessee itself had before the Tribunal contended that such provisions for the doubtful debt cannot be added for the computation of book profit for Section 115JA since there is no clause which speaks of adding back such provisions for diminution of value of assets. It is not in dispute that such provisions for doubtful debts would be which amount to diminution of value of assets. That being the position, in our opinion the case of the assessee is squarely covered under the clause (g) to explanation to Section 115JA.
We are unable to see any demarcation between the provisions which would reduce the value of the assets against a situation where the value of the assets may come down to 'Nil'. In either case there would be diminution in the value of assets. Even when the value of the assets is brought down to 'Nil' from the previously existing value, it can still be stated that there has been a diminution in the value of the assets. In any case no such facts arise in this appeal.In the result, the question is answered in favour of revenue
........
|
