|
Advanced Search Options
Income Tax - Case Laws
Showing 21 to 40 of 667 Records
-
2020 (12) TMI 1354 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Interim stay - HELD THAT:- As is represented by Mrs. S. Srimathy, learned Special Government Pleader that this Court, in similar issue in has granted an interim stay.
Since this Court in similar issue has granted interim stay, there shall be an order of interim stay as prayed. Notice.
-
2020 (12) TMI 1352 - ITAT MUMBAI
Avalibility of “Vivad Se Vishwas” Scheme - HELD THAT:- As counsel fairly accepts that they have no objection to the appeal being dismissed as withdrawn as long as their right for revival of the appeal is protected, in the event of some unfortunate reason, the matter being not settled under the above Scheme.
DR has no objection to the above.
The Government of India enacted the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (Act No. 3 of 2020) to provide for resolution of disputed tax and for matter connected therewith or incidental thereto. The Act of the Parliament received the assent of the President on 17.03.2020 and published in the Gazette of India on 17.03.2020. In terms of the said Act, the assessee has been given an option to put an end to the tax disputes, which may be pending at different levels either before the First Appellate Authority or before the Tribunal or before the High Court or before the Supreme Court of India.
We dismiss the appeal as withdrawn, subject to the rider that in the unlikely event of matter not being resolved under the above Scheme, the assessee shall have liberty to approach the Tribunal for restoration of its appeal.
-
2020 (12) TMI 1345 - ITAT MUMBAI
Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 - HELD THAT:- Government of India enacted the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (Act No. 3 of 2020) to provide for resolution of disputed tax and for matter connected therewith or incidental thereto. The Act of the Parliament received the assent of the President on 17.03.2020 and published in the Gazette of India on 17.03.2020. In terms of the said Act, the assessee has been given an option to put an end to the tax disputes, which may be pending at different levels either before the First Appellate Authority or before the Tribunal or before the High Court or before the Supreme Court of India.
We dismiss these appeals as withdrawn, subject to the rider that in the unlikely event of matter not being resolved under the above Scheme, the assessee as well as Revenue shall have liberty to approach the Tribunal for restoration of the appeal for AY 2012-13 and assessee for AY 2013-14.
-
2020 (12) TMI 1343 - ITAT HYDERABAD
Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 - assessee has submitted withdrawal application stating that the assessee has opted to settle the dispute relating to the tax arrears - HELD THAT:- As we accept the request of the assessee for withdrawal of the appeal as Pr.CIT-2 has issued Form-3.
The aforesaid is subject to a caveat that in case the dispute relating to tax arrears for the captioned A.Y. is not ultimately resolved in terms of the afore-stated Act, the appellant (i.e. the assessee) is at liberty to approach the Tribunal for reinstitution of the appeal and the Tribunal shall consider such application appropriate as per law. The Ld.DR for the revenue has no objection with regard to the aforesaid caveat.
-
2020 (12) TMI 1336 - ITAT JODHPUR
Validity of assessment u/s 153A - Whether no incriminating evidence / material was found during the course of search? - HELD THAT:- From the facts, it emerges that the original return was filed by the assessee on 04/09/2008 and the search took place on 16/04/2013. Admittedly, no assessment proceedings were pending against assessee on the date of search and it was not a case of abated assessment. Upon perusal of the assessment order, it is quite evident that Ld. AO has not referred to any incriminating material against the assessee and the additions made therein are also not based on any incriminating material. The business expenditure claimed that is sought to be disallowed was already claimed in the original return of income.
The facts of the case, in our considered opinion are squarely covered in assessee’s favor by the decision in CIT V/s Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. [2015 (5) TMI 656 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] as well in Gurinder Singh Bawa [2015 (10) TMI 1761 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] which has held that in the absence of any incriminating material, the unabated assessments could not be disturbed. Similar is the view of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT V/s Kabul Chawla[2015 (9) TMI 80 - DELHI HIGH COURT].
Thus we are inclined to setaside the additions so made in the hands of the assessee in the assessment order. The ground thus raised stand allowed.
Disallowance of business expenditure - business had not been commenced - HELD THAT:- Upon due consideration, we find that the premises was taken on lease since 2006 and the business could not be commenced by the assessee till AY 2014-15 which would substantiate the fact that there was not any temporary dormancy or lull period for the business. No fresh material has been placed before us to disturb these findings rendered by learned first appellate authority. However, in our considered opinion, the expenditure which was quite necessary to maintain assessee’s corporate personality would be an allowable expenditure since without incurring the same, the assessee could not have remained into existence. Therefore, we direct Ld. AO to identify such expenditure and allow the same to that extent. The assessee is directed to furnish the requisite details, in this regard.
-
2020 (12) TMI 1333 - ITAT MUMBAI
Condonation of delay - delay of 272 days in filing this appeal before ITAT - HELD THAT:- The assessee is fully aware of the delay and the fact that there is no condonation petition or any reasonable cause for the delay aattributed by the assessee on record. Earlier the assessee has sought time to provide the same. Now the assessee submits further adjournments. In our considered opinion when there is a delay of 272 days which is quite considerable it was incumbent upon the assessee to file the condonation petition and submit the reasonable cause for the delay along the appeal. Despite being made aware of the delay the assessee has been seeking adjournment time and again.
Accordingly in our considered opinion the assessee having filed no condonation petition or submitted any reasonable cause for the delay, this appeal is liable to be dismissed as time-barred. Accordingly this appeal is dismissed as time-barred. - Assessee appeal dismissed.
-
2020 (12) TMI 1331 - SC ORDER
Unaccounted cash receipts - amount is assessed in the hands of the two recipient entities as aforesaid and not the assessee - Addition u/s 68 - Unexplained cash credit confirmed as onus which had shifted upon the Revenue, has been appreciably discharged by the Revenue and addition confirmed - HELD THAT:- SLP dismissed.
-
2020 (12) TMI 1330 - ITAT PUNE
Excess sugarcane price paid to the members & non members - HELD THAT:- The issue relating to excess sugarcane price paid by the assessee, the issue is restored to the file of Assessing Officer with similar directions as above in the cases of M/s. Vasant Rao Dada Patil SSK Ltd.[2019 (3) TMI 1637 - ITAT PUNE] and also consider the contentions of assessee with respect to SMP vis-a-vis FRP regime, where ever raised. The Assessing Officer shall decide the issue, after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the respective assessees, in accordance with law - Ground relating to the issue of excess cane price paid to members & non members is allowed for statistical purposes in the aforesaid terms.
Sale of Sugar at Concessional rate to members - HELD THAT:- As relying on SHRI SHANKAR SSK LTD [2019 (6) TMI 1399 - ITAT PUNE] the issue sale of sugar at concessional rate to member is remanded to the file of Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication for the purpose of giving effect to the directions of Hon’ble Apex Court KRISHNA SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD. [2012 (11) TMI 669 - SUPREME COURT] in proper perspective.
Beneficiary Membership Capital & C Class membership capital - HELD THAT:- As relying on KARMAVEER SHANKARRAO KALE SSK LTD. VERSUS ACIT, AHMEDNAGAR [2019 (9) TMI 1475 - ITAT PUNE] we are of the considered view that the issue relates to the C-class membership fee is required to be remanded to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. Assessing Officer shall grant reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and pass a speaking order. Accordingly, the relevant grounds raised by the assessee on this issue are allowed for statistical purposes.
Contribution towards Area Development fund - HELD THAT:- As relying on SHRI SHANKAR SSK LTD [2019 (6) TMI 1399 - ITAT PUNE] we are of the considered view that the issue relates to the contribution towards Area Development Fund is required to be remanded to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. The Assessing Officer shall grant reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and pass a speaking order on this issue. Accordingly, the relevant grounds raised by the assessee on this issue are allowed for statistical purposes.
Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
-
2020 (12) TMI 1320 - ITAT MUMBAI
Rectification u/s 154 - HELD THAT:- At page 60, paragraph 47 is, on account of a typographical error, numbered as paragraph 37.
Accordingly, “37” in the beginning of this paragraph stands substituted by “47”; and, all remaining paragraphs are renumbered as 48 to 67, instead of 38 to 57.
At page 60-61, certain observations were made about Mr Cyrus Mistry. One fact, which was inadvertently missed out, was that the information furnished by Mr Mistry was in response to a notice. Under these circumstances, the observations made in para-38, which is now renumbered on account of typographical mistake as para-48, is modified by substituting as under:-
“48. It is well known that Cyrus Mistry, a former Chairman of the Tata Group, was removed from his position in the Tata Group on 24th October 2016, and within eight weeks of his removal, he sends this material in response to notice, against the trusts in the Tata group - including the assessee before us, to the Assessing Officer. The inputs from those engaged in a rivalry with an assessee ought to have been considered by the department with a reasonable degree of circumspection and should not be placed on such a high pedestal so as to relegate all other material facts and accepted past assessment history of the case into insignificance.”
The above mistakes stand rectified accordingly, and, to that extent, the order dated 28th December, 2020 stands modified.
-
2020 (12) TMI 1315 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Addition u/s 43B - interest paid to Government of Tamil Nadu - ITAT said matter should go back to the A0 to verify as to whether assessee paid the interest to Government of Tamil Nadu or to any other financial institution or it is only a provision made - HELD THAT:- Against the remand order of the Tribunal, we do not find any substantial question of law to be arising in the present case and therefore, the Assessing Authority may take action in accordance with law in pursuance of the remand order of the learned Tribunal.
-
2020 (12) TMI 1313 - ITAT CHENNAI
Exemption u/s.80P - interest income received from the staff of the Assessee’s Society - HELD THAT:- Assessee’s Society has existed only for the members of the Telecom Employees Co-operative Society and not for the benefit of the staff of the Telecom Employees Co-operative Society. The Telecom Employees Co-operative Society is an altogether different from the staff of the Assessee. Therefore, the claim made by the Assessee u/s.80P is not an eligible claim and therefore the Assessing Officer as well as the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) rightly denied the claim of the Assessee u/s.80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In this appeal, the issue has been decided against the Assessee and in favour of the Revenue.
Treatment of interest income as income from other sources - expenditure incurred by the Assessee to earn the interest income - HELD THAT:- The case of the Assessee is that the Assessing Officer has treated the interest income earned by the Assessee has income from other sources and estimated the expenditure only. In the Assessment Order, the Assessing Officer has not properly considered the expenditure incurred by the Assessee to earn the interest income and simply estimated the interest expenditure.
It is not correct. Thus we set aside the order passed by CIT (Appeals) on this count and remit back the matter back to the Assessing Officer to adjudicate the issue afresh in accordance with law de novo.
-
2020 (12) TMI 1310 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - Non disposing the objections raised by the Petitioner - HELD THAT:- Having regard to the fact that the reasons for re-opening had been furnished by Respondent on 10.05.2017 and the Petitioner had not promptly raised objections, the Respondent cannot be faulted for proceeding further to take final decision. When this view was expressed, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has sought permissions of this Court to withdraw the Writ Petition with liberty to the Petitioner to apply for reviving the appeal against the impugned order before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Chennai, so as to raise all contentions including the factual aspects in the objections in the letter dated 22.11.2017 sent to the Respondent. He has also filed a memo dated 22.12.2020 through e-mail to that effect, which is placed on record.
-
2020 (12) TMI 1302 - ITAT DEHRADUN
Assessment of trust - addition in respect of profit from business undertakings - setting off the loss incurred by the Trust from the profits of business undertakings - THAT:- Hon’ble Uttarakhand High Court in Assessee’s case for A.Y. 2009- 10 [2019 (2) TMI 1616 - UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT]has held that the Assessing Officer was not justified in denying the assessee exemption under Section 11/12 of the Act which is confirmed by the Hon’ble Apex Court [2019 (8) TMI 535 - SC ORDER] Besides this, for A.Y. 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14 as well the Tribunal has decided the identical issue in favour of the assessee. There is no change in facts in the present assessment year and no distinguishing facts were pointed out by the Ld. DR. Therefore, the CIT(A) rightly allowed the appeal of the assessee. There is no need to interfere with the findings of the CIT(A). Hence, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.
-
2020 (12) TMI 1300 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Set-off of losses of a 10A/10AA unit against other business income - Whether tribunal was right in excluding the computer software sales made to STP/SEZ units in India from 'export turnover' for the purpose of computing deduction under Section 10A/10AA - excluding the VAT / GST from export turnover and total turnover for the purpose of computing deduction under Section 10A/10AA - tribunal concluding that 80% of the up linking charges had to be excluded from the definition of turnover, when even the respondent had limited such exclusion to 5% of the telecommunication charges in earlier years? - Tribunal concluding that purchase and sales of monitors constituted a trading activity and thus excludible from the profits of the Pondicherry unit for the purposes of computing deduction under Section 80-IB of the Act, when such monitors were part of the computers manufactured and sold by the units - HELD THAT:- When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the assessee submits that this appeal may be disposed of in terms of the judgment passed in [2020 (12) TMI 687 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT].
-
2020 (12) TMI 1280 - ITAT BANGALORE
TDS u/s 194B or 194BB - disallowance in respect of payment of stake money under section 40(a)(ia) - stake money and cups disbursed to horse owners without deducting TDS - HELD THAT:- As decided by Mumbai Tribunal in case of Royal Western Turf Club Ltd [2019 (8) TMI 402 - ITAT MUMBAI] section 194B/194BB are not applicable to stake money.
Respectfully following the same we also hold that stake money paid by assessee to the horse owners are not liable to TDS under section 194B or section 194 BB of the Act. Consequentially no disallowance could be made under section 40 (a) (ia) of the act in the hands of assessee. - Decided in favour of assessee.
-
2020 (12) TMI 1279 - ITAT SURAT
Disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) - no tax was deducted on the interest expenses - AR submits that one of the recipient i.e. India Bulls has shown interest expenses as their income and have offered the same for taxation as assessee has obtained certificate of Accountant and the provisions of section 201(1) of Income Tax Act, certifying that they have paid the tax on such interest income. Thus, the condition of second proviso of section 40(a)(ia) have been fulfilled - HELD THAT:- As the second provision the section is applicable and that no disallowance interest expenditure can be made in the hand of assessee and that various benches of Tribunal has taken a view that the second proviso is curative and declaratory in nature. The ld. AR of the assessee has also placed on record the certificate of Chartered Accountant under section 201(1) of the Act, certifying the facts that India Bulls (one of the recipients) has included the said interest income in their income and has paid tax thereon.
We are in the agreement, the submission of assessee that in case the recipient (India Bulls) has included the interest paid by assessee, in their income and have paid tax therein, no disallowances can be made in the hand of assessee. Therefore, we direct the Assessing Officer to verify the fact and allow appropriate relief to the assessee in accordance with law. The assessee also directed to supervise necessary evidence to the Assessing Officer.
-
2020 (12) TMI 1277 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Disallowance of the provision - Whether Tribunal erred in holding that the Appellant had failed to demonstrate either before the lower authorities or before it that the liability had accrued during the year, arrived at a finding that was contrary to the material placed on record and thus perverse? - HELD THAT:- As assessee had produced a comparative statement showing the sales in which erection is pending, the corresponding provisioning, the actual expenses incurred in the next year for financial years 2005-06 to 2011-12 and ledger account extracts of the provisions for erection and commissioning, which evidences reversals as on the last day of financial year. However, the CIT(Appeals) has not taken note of the aforesaid material produced by the assessee.
Tribunal has held that the assessee has failed to demonstrate either before the CIT (A) or before the tribunal that liability has accrued during the year and the fact that the substantial provision was reversed in subsequent years. The aforesaid finding is contrary to the material available on record. Therefore, in the facts of the case, the material produced by the assessee before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) as well as the tribunal needs factual adjudication - Remit the matter to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to adjudicate the aforesaid issue afresh in the light of materials produced by the assessee and in view of law laid down in CALCUTTA CO. LTD. [1959 (5) TMI 3 - SUPREME COURT], BHARAT EARTH MOVERS [2000 (8) TMI 4 - SUPREME COURT] and ROTORN CONTROLS INDIA PVT. LTD. [2009 (5) TMI 16 - SUPREME COURT]
-
2020 (12) TMI 1276 - ITAT MUMBAI
Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - assessee is beneficiary of bogus long term capital gain - HELD THAT:- AO after analyzing the information received from the Directorate of Investigation recorded reasons u/s 148(2) by referring to the return of income filed by the assessee and information furnished by the assessee qua the sale of shares and long term capital gain and came to conclusion that assessee’s income has escaped assessment accordingly.
Reopening of assessment is based on specific information as the director of investigation has specifically provided information to the AO that assessee is beneficiary of bogus long term capital gain which is a part of big racket - we do not find any merit in the contentions of the assessee that there is no linkage between the report of the investigation wing, statement of various individual recorded during the search with the facts of the appellant. Though the statement of various persons/brokers/exit provider did not name the assessee, however, during overall investigation of the entire scam the assessee’s name came to light that he is beneficiary of these bogus long term capital gain - we are inclined to dismiss the ground raised by the assessee on jurisdiction. Accordingly ground no. 1 is dismissed.
Addition u/s 68 and u/s 69C of the Act being 5% commission on total sales proceeds - As we find merit in the arguments of the Ld A.R. that assessee has furnished all the informations, details, documentary evidences before the AO but the AO has not done any further verification to find out the truth or done anything to prove the money trail of the funds as has been alleged in the order. Under these circumstances, we are not in a position to sustain the order of Ld. CIT(A) upholding the order of AO wherein the long term capital gain has been held to be non genuine and bogus - we are inclined to set aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) and direct the AO to delete the addition made under section 68. Addition made by the AO towards commission paid on the accommodation entry is a consequential one and is also deleted.
-
2020 (12) TMI 1273 - ITAT DELHI
Exemption u/s 11 - whether any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business for a cess or fee shall not be charitable if receipt from such activities is more than 25 lacs during the year? - assessee is a society registered u/s. 12A of the Act and is also notified u/s. 80G(5)(vi) - HELD THAT:- As on identical facts in A.Y. 2011-12 [2019 (11) TMI 1036 - ITAT DELHI] his predecessor allowed the appeal of the assessee and directed the AO to allow exemption u/s. 11 - it is held that the assessee is apparently not involved in any trade, commerce or business and as such the proviso to section 2(15) is not applicable. Exemption under section 11(1) is allowed to the assessee. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer is directed to allow exemption under section 11, with all the consequential benefits. Ground of the appeal are allowed.
-
2020 (12) TMI 1272 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS — NCR BENCH (INCOME-TAX)
Application for advance ruling u/s 245R - Whether application cannot be allowed if the question raised in the application is already pending before any Income-tax authority or Appellate Tribunal? - notice under section 143(2) was for scrutiny under computer aided scrutiny selection (CASS) and the only reason for selection was "refund claim" - HELD THAT:- The applicant has categorically stated that neither the notice under section 142(1) of the Act nor any questionnaire was received prior to the filing of the present application. AO might have examined all the aspects, including the issues raised in the present application, while examining the issue of "refund claim" for which the case was selected for scrutiny. But the fact remains that such issues were not raised by the AO before filing of the present application. In the absence of any specific question in respect of the issues raised in the present application, it cannot be concluded that the questions raised in the present application was already pending before the Income-tax authority. The general notice as issued in this case is found to be insufficient to attract the rejection of the application under clause (i) of the proviso to section 245R(2) of the Act.
In the present case the notice was issued in a standard preprinted format and the specific issues as appearing in this application were not part of the said notice. The hon'ble Delhi High Court has also held in the case of Sage Publications Ltd., U.K. [2016 (9) TMI 299 - DELHI HIGH COURT] that issue of notice under section 143(2) even prior to filing of application before the Authority for Advance Rulings, ipso facto would be insufficient to attract automatic rejection of the said application under the proviso to section 245R(2) of the Act and the special leave petition filed against this decision was dismissed by the apex court.
Thus the notice under section 143(2) was issued in response to computer aided scrutiny selection reason of "refund claim". The specific question in respect of strategic alliance agreement entered into by the applicant with PVR was never raised by the Assessing Officer in any of the notices or the questionnaire issued before the filing of the present application. As held by the hon'ble court such notice cannot attract the automatic rejection route under clause (i) of the proviso to section 245R(2) of the Act as the questions raised in the present application are not found pending before the Income-tax authority.The application is admitted under section 245R(2).
........
|
