2018 (4) TMI 1372 - JAMMU & KASHMIR HIGH COURT
M/s Kohinoor Enterprises Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Others
Addition u/s 68 on account of unsecured loans - Held that - The matter pertains to some six years back and it has been explained by the Assessee that the loan in question is outstanding due to the financial crunch being faced by the appellant firm. We find substance in the contentions of the learned counsel for the Assessee/appellant before us as the material/ reply placed by the Assessee before the Assessing Officer has not been considered and n....... + More
2018 (4) TMI 1371 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Srinidhi Karti Chidambaram Versus The Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, The Director General of Income Tax (Investigation) , The Deputy Director of Income Tax (Investigation)
Validity of notice u/s 10(1) - Prosecution proceedings under the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015 - information regarding certain investments in acquiring assets abroad - Held that - Time given for completion of assessment and reassessment is only in terms of Section 11 of the Act. Section 11 1) of the Act states that, no order of assessment or reassessment shall be made under Section 10, after t....... + More
2018 (4) TMI 1370 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax CIT (A) Versus M/s. Lakshminarayana Mining Company
Claim of deduction u/s 10B - whether mere processing of the iron ore in a plant and machinery located outside the bonded area will not disentitle the assessee from deduction where the iron ore was excavated from the mining area belonging to an export oriented unit - location of the SESA Plant outside the EOU and customs bonded area - Held that - The judgment in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Caritor (India) Pvt. Ltd. (2015 (2) TMI 670....... + More
2018 (4) TMI 1369 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Shri. C.S. Seshadri
Personal expenses - whether can be taxed in the hands of assessee u/s 2(24)(iv) as the amount was routed through the franchisee, which was the HUF of the assessee? - Held that - See case of Commissioner of Income-Tax, Chennai Vs.C.S.Srivatsan 2013 (3) TMI 248 - MADRAS HIGH COURT as held the assessees have various avathars in various establishments - each of the unit has different composition. Each unit has varied number of members. Under such cir....... + More
2018 (4) TMI 1368 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
M/s. Gem Granites Versus The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
Crane hire charges treated as turnover of the appellant - alternate plea for permission to set off the crane hire charges paid against the crane hire charges received - Held that - This particular crane higher charges received by the assessee was a part of the regular operation of the business and it was never the case of the assessee that it forms part of the total turnover. - As relying on case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs.K.Ravindranathan ....... + More
2018 (4) TMI 1367 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
The Pr. Commissioner of Income-Tax, CIT (A) Versus M/s. CEDEGIM Software India Pvt. Ltd.
Eligibility for deduction u/s.10A - excluding the value of telecommunication expenses and traveling expenses in foreign currency both from the export turnover and total turnover - Held that - Taking into consideration the decision rendered in the case of CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd 2011 (8) TMI 782 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT we are of the view that the order directing to exclude communication charges and travelling and conveyance expenses both from export ....... + More
2018 (4) TMI 1366 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
The Commissioner of Income Tax Versus M/s GE Thermometrics India Pvt. Ltd., (Presently Exa Thermometrics India Pvt. Ltd.,)
Benefit claimed by the assessee u/s 10B - Held that - In view of the omission of sub-Section (9) in Section 10B with effect from 01. 04.2004 should it be understood that the said section never existed in the statute book and therefore, the benefit claimed by the assessee under Section 10B should be allowed. See CIT-A vs. M/S. GE THERMOMETRICS INDIA (P) LIMITED 2015 (1) TMI 10 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT - Decided in favour of assessee........ + More
2018 (4) TMI 1289 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
State Bank of India Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 2 (2) (1) & Others
Reopening of assessment - sanction u/s 151 - a condition precedent to issue the reopening notice - Held that - It is settled position that reopening of an assessment is an exceptional power vested in the Assessing Officer to unsettle, settled issues/ assessment. Therefore, the exercise of such a power can only be done as the AO fulfilling the conditions precedent for issuing the notice. The notice of reopening has to be issued within the time pro....... + More
2018 (4) TMI 1288 - JAMMU & KASHMIR HIGH COURT
Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Versus The Jammu Central Coop. Bank Ltd.
Addition u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D - Held that - The said provision cannot be applied to any assessment year prior to Assessment Year 2008-09, the department plea has to fail. Hence, no question of law arises....... + More
2018 (4) TMI 1287 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-5 Versus M/s. Shodiman Investments Pvt. Ltd.,
Reopening of assessment - non application of mind by AO - information received from the DIT (Investigation) - Held that - No information received from the DIT (Investigation) about a particular entity, entering into suspicious transactions. Material is not further linked by any reason to come to the conclusion that the Assessee has indulged in any activity which could give rise to reason to believe on the part of the AO that income chargeable to ....... + More
2018 (4) TMI 1286 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
M/s. Agasthiya Granite P Ltd Versus The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
Revision u/s 263 - claim for deduction under Sections 80 HHC (4B) and 80 IB - mandate exclusion of the deduction allowed under Section 80 IB of the Act while quantifying the deduction under Section 80 HHC of the Act - Held that - Where two views are possible and the income tax officer has taken one view with which the Commissioner of Income Tax does not agree, it cannot be treated as an erroneous order prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue, ....... + More
2018 (4) TMI 1285 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Johnson & Johnson Private Limited Versus Commissioner of Income Tax, LTU
Transfer Pricing - Expenditure incurred by the Appellant on AMP - Whether was an international transaction for the purposes of adjustment under Chapter X of the Act? - Held that - As both parties are broadly agreed that there are subsequent developments in law, which the Tribunal should consider while deciding the second round of appeal before it. The Tribunal is at liberty to adjudicate the issues arising in the second round of appeaL interalia ....... + More
2018 (4) TMI 1284 - CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT
M/s Aarti Sponge & Power Ltd. Versus The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-2 (1) , The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -1, The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Aaykar Bhavan, Raipur (C.G.)
Application for stay of the disputed demand - reduction of 20 deposit - Held that - The appeal proceedings are separate and distinct from recovery proceedings and further proceeded to hold that 20 of the disputed demand has not been deposited in accordance with the guidelines dated 31-7-2017 and passed the order dated 7-3-2018. It is quite vivid that the application for stay of demand has not been considered in the manner it was required to be co....... + More
2018 (4) TMI 1283 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Mr. J. Stephen Versus The Income Tax Officer, Ward V (1) , Coimbatore
Maintainability of appeal under Section 260-A - substantial question of law - Held that - To be substantial a question of law must be debatable, not previously settled by law of the land or a binding precedent, and must have a material bearing on the decision of the case, if answered either way, insofar as the rights of the parties before it are concerned. - The question is whether the explanation given by the appellant assessee for cash deposits....... + More
2018 (4) TMI 1212 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-26 Mumbai Versus R.F. Nangrani HUF
Addition u/s 45(1) under the head long term capital gains - Whether right of partner in the partnership firm is a capital asset u/s 2(14) and retirement of partner lead to extinguishment of such right in the firm amounting to transfer u/s 2(47) giving rise to capital gains exigible to tax? - amount received as goodwill on retirement is taxable in the hands of the retiring partner as capital gain - Held that - There is nothing on record to indicat....... + More
2018 (4) TMI 1211 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
EDC Limited, Versus The Commissioner of Income Tax, Panaj-Goa.
Disallowance u/s 14A - Held that - We are of the opinion that the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal should reconsider the issue after taking note of the decision of the Special Bench in case of Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 17(1), New Delhi v. Vireet Investment (P.) Ltd. 2017 (6) TMI 1124 - ITAT DELHI . Accordingly, the question of law as framed is answered as above........ + More
2018 (4) TMI 1210 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-4 Versus Prakashkumar Bhagchandbhai Khatri
Deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) - Tribunal confirming the view of the CIT (Appeals) opined that the amount in question was in the nature of trade advances to the assessee made by the company and not a loan - Held that - The assessee had entered into an agreement with the company for development and consideration of the land which was owned by the assessee. Various transactions of such agreement pertain to the negotiation of sale price to be received....... + More
2018 (4) TMI 1138 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Arjun Malhotra Versus Commissioner of Income Tax, Director of Income Tax, New Delhi
Transfer u/s 2(47) - capital gain - shares owned by the appellant at NIIT were not transferred in the assessment year 1998-99 but were transferred on 05.05.1998 (Assessment Year 1999-2000) when the same were delivered by the bankers to the purchasers (Glad Investment Pvt. Ltd.) - Held that - We reject and not take into consideration the factual contention that the transfer deeds were received by NIIT on 22nd August 1997, which contention even oth....... + More
2018 (4) TMI 1137 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Kaushalya Devi (Deceased) Through Legal Representatives Versus Commissioner of Income Tax
Deduction to Section 48 while computing capital gains - expenditure of ₹ 25,00,000/- incurred by the assessee by way of liquidated damages paid to the first purchaser incurred in connection with the transfer of the property - whether be deducted from the sale consideration for computing the long term gain? - Held that - There was a close nexus and connect between the payment of ₹ 25,00,000/- and the transfer of the property to the pur....... + More
2018 (4) TMI 1136 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
The Commissioner of Income Tax-LTU Versus M/s. Lupin Limited
Computing the value of Fringe benefit for the purpose of FBT - Addition on account of FBT on total expenses and not merely on expenses pertaining to employees - Tribunal deleted the addition - Held that - In the present facts, we find that the Tribunal has rendered a finding of fact that the expenditure has been incurred to make payment to third parties. Inasmuch as, this payment nowhere arises out of the employee/employer relationship. It is a b....... + More
Search 
