|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 161 to 180 of 1390 Records
-
2023 (6) TMI 1230 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Issuance of Suspension proceedings - Action on enquiry report - petitioner were put under suspension without any basis and without following the procedure prescribed under the A.P. Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1991 - HELD THAT:- It is manifest that the respondent authorities already conducted detailed enquiries on two occasions i.e., on 16.04.2021 and 19.12.2022, and by relying the said enquiry reports and without observing the principles of natural justice and without providing any opportunity to the petitioner to submit an explanation, the present impugned orders came to be passed by de horsing the procedure as contemplated under Rules 21 and 22 (1) of the CCA Rules, 1991.
On a perusal of the Rule 8 (1), this Court is of the opinion that Rule 8(1) is not applicable, since the enquiry was already completed twice in the present case and the enquiry reports were submitted by the Inquiry Officers on 16.04.2021 and 19.12.2022.
As per service jurisprudence, as stated by the respondents, that the notice is contemplated under Rule 8(1) of CCA Rules before issuing impugned proceedings is misconception, but in the given facts and circumstances and also as per the circular issued by the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC), if any enquiry or anyaction is proceeded by the disciplinary authority basing upon anonymous letters/complaints by third parties or news reports, the authority under obligation to issue prior notice to concerned delinquents before any enquiry/action. The detailed enquiries were already conducted and basing upon the enquiry reports, the present impugned orders were passed.
As seen from the impugned order, it is crystal clear that no show cause notice and no charge memo were issued to the petitioner to submit his explanation and no opportunity was given to him to participate in the enquiries said to have been conducted by the respondents. The fact remains that the enquiries were not conducted as per the CCA Rules, 1991 without complying the procedure as contemplated under Rule 20 of CCA Rules, 1991 - It is also settled principle of law that, basing upon anonymous letter or complaint from the public and news reports, neither the disciplinary proceedings nor punishment can be proceeded/imposed/awarded.
The enquiry reports dated 16.04.2021 and 19.12.2022 cannot be relied upon. Therefore, the power of suspension is only to be used to achieve the object to keep the delinquent away from the records and witnesses at the time of enquiry, but here enquiry was already completed, and the power cannot be used as a means of punishment. In fact, the present impugned proceedings does not speak any administrative exigencies, but due to the enquiry reports which are unknown to the petitioner, the impugned proceedings were issued for other reasons particularly as punitive measure only.
The respondents did not follow due process of law before issuing the impugned orders, which would attract the principle of malice in law as the impugned order was not based on any real factor germane and it was based upon the allegations made against a unit of Department in a news item published in a Telugu Newspaper on 04.04.2021. Admittedly, the petitioner never discharged his duties at the subject unit and his duties do not at all relate to collection of tax as alleged - Petition allowed.
-
2023 (6) TMI 1229 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, TELANGANA
Scope of assessment under GST Act, 2017 - contract completed during the Pre-GST period and demand based on the completed contract can be brought to assessment under GST Act, 2017 or not - liquidated damages, without any supply of materials and labor - arbitral award, in the nature of compensation, payable for delay in completion of the contract and agreed to be payable by the Applicant to DGAL without any supply of goods or services - ITC on the GST amount if any levied on the mutually agreed arbitral award amount received from the Applicant - taxability under GST on Interest payable on the liquidated damages?'
Whether a mutually agreed amount for settling a dispute arising out of breach of contract constitute a supply within the scope of Entry 5(e) of Schedule-II to the CGST Act, 2017 and hence taxable?
HELD THAT:- Circular No. 178/10/2022-GST dated 03-08-2022 discusses the taxability of an activity on a transaction as supply of service of agreeing to the obligations to refrain from an act or to tolerate an act or a situation, or to do an act under the GST. This includes applicability of GST on payments in the nature of liquidated damage, compensation, penalty, cancellation charges, late payment surcharge, etc., arising out of breach of contract or otherwise and scope of entry at para-5(e) of schedule-II of Central Goods & Service Tax Act, 2017.
The flow of consideration in the instant case fall under para-7.1.3 and para-7.1.4 of circular No. 178/10/2022, dated: 03-08-2022, therefore such consideration as stipulated in the said circular are not taxable as there is no supply of service under entry-5(e) of Schedule-II of the CGST Act, 2017.
In the instant case, as no supply has happened during the GST regime as per Section 142(10) of the act ibid no GST shall be payable. Further the additional payment received by way of compensation through award by Hon’ble Tribunal for Arbitration is not falling under Section 142(2)(a) and hence not chargeable to GST.
-
2023 (6) TMI 1228 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, UTTAR PRADESH
Exemption from CGST and UPGST - supply of education and training services to commercial pilots in accordance with the training curriculum approved by the Directorate General of Civil Aviation for obtaining the extension of aircraft type ratings on their existing licenses - to be covered under Si. No. 66 (a) of the Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.6.2017 and Si. No. 66 (a) of the Notification No. A.NI-2-843/X1-9(47)/ 17- U.P. Act-1-2017-Order- (10) -2017 dated 30.6.2017 or not? - HELD THAT:- The applicant is engaged in the business of facilitating the training of commercial pilots on the Aircraft Simulators installed at its training facilities. Such training is provided in accordance with the training curriculum approved by the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (hereinafter referred to as “DGCA”) for obtaining the extension of aircraft type ratings on their existing licenses.
Whether the supply of education and training services to commercial pilots in accordance with the training curriculum approved by the Directorate General of Civil Aviation for obtaining the extension of aircraft type ratings on their existing licenses would be covered under Si. No. 66 (a) of the Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.6.2017? - HELD THAT:- The applicant does not provide any licence to the pilots as they are not the competent authority. Issuance and granting of commercial pilot licenses falls under the exclusive domain of DGCA. The applicant is only conducting training courses which helps the trainees to increase/accumulate ratings for flying specific aircrafts. Moreover, the trainees will have to undergo skill test when they complete simulator training at the institute. It is based on the results of these tests and examination and after fulfillment of other parameters that the DGCA would endorse the type ratings of aircraft in the licenses of trainee pilots. Therefore merely conducting a course or its completion is not a qualification which is recognized by law. The fact that such a completion of course may be taken into account by the DGCA for the purpose of evaluating the experience and content of training, will not make it statutory in character.
The applicant, during the course of personal hearing, accepted that they do not provide any licence, degree or diploma certificate to the trainees. It is just the completion of training course which is mentioned. It is observed that there is no statutory requirement for the course completion certificate which enables the trainee pilots to apply to DGCA for appearing in the examination conducted by it. It is the examination conducted by the DGCA which is the statutory requirement and not any examination by the applicant. The applicant is merely preparing the trainees for such Type Rating Examinations - Hence, it cannot be construed that the applicant is an educational institute which provides services by way of education as a part of a curriculum for obtaining a qualification recognized by any law for the time being in force.
The applicant has declared that the training course conducted by them enables the pilots to get employment in the commercial airlines. This view of the applicant is not supported by the facts. Because the trainees after undergoing type rating training courses with the applicant will not be able to get employment with the airlines directly. As per Rule 6A of the Aircraft Rules, no person shall fly as pilot of an aircraft which is not included or entered in the Aircraft rating of the licence. Meaning thereby, a trainee can fly an aircraft and consequently seek employment with an airlines only after his or her licence has been endorsed with the aircraft rating for the specified aircraft by the DGCA - a commercial pilots licence holder cannot seek the job of flying an aircraft for which he has undergone Type Rating Training unless an endorsement to that effect is made in the licence of the CPL holder by the DGCA. It is the endorsement which makes him eligible to obtain employment with Airlines to fly the aircrafts for which he has been type rated and not the fact of having completed the training with the institute.
The supply of education and training services to commercial pilots in accordance with the training curriculum approved by the Directorate General of Civil Aviation for obtaining the extension of aircraft type ratings on their existing licenses is not exempted under Si. No. 66 (a) of the Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.6.2017.
-
2023 (6) TMI 1227 - PATIALA HOUSE COURTS
Seeking grant of anticipatory bail - territorial jurisdiction of this court for entertaining the present application - HELD THAT:- Similar question arose in Pritam Singh Vs. State of Punjab [1980 (12) TMI 201 - DELHI HIGH COURT], it was held that cognizable offence was alleged to have been committed in the State of Punjab whereas the anticipatory bail was applied before the Delhi High Court as the accused had reasonable apprehension of arrest in Delhi - In that context, it was observed that there is nothing in Section 438 CrPC which restricts the jurisdiction of High Court or Court of Session. “One need not mix up the jurisdiction relating to cognizance of an offence with that of granting of bails. Bails are against arrest and detention. Therefore, an appropriate court within whose jurisdiction the arrest takes place or is apprehended or is contemplated will also have jurisdiction to grant bail to the person concerned.”
This court has territorial jurisdiction to entertain the present application - Application disposed off.
-
2023 (6) TMI 1226 - SC ORDER
Deduction u/s 10A in respect of provisions written back towards link charges and annual day expenses and the said claim was not derived by an undertaking from the export of article or thing or computer software - HELD THAT:- This Court is of the opinion that no interference is called for in the impugned judgment and order of the High Court [2021 (1) TMI 168 - MADRAS HIGH COURT]
The question of law will be considered on its own merits in the pending CA No. 9175 of 2018 (appeal from CIT v. HEWLETT PACKARD GLOBAL SOFT LTD. 2017 (11) TMI 205 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT.
SLP is dismissed in the above terms.
-
2023 (6) TMI 1225 - SC ORDER
Nature of subsidy receipt - value of the MILIEV grant given by the Dutch government as a subsidy for purchase of wind turbine generator - transfer of right by the assessee to another company, no offset credit and electricity charges paid to Wescare as deduction - HC confirmed ITAT orders - HELD THAT:- Delay condoned.
In view of the order passed by this Court in [2023 (6) TMI 1171 - SC ORDER] no case for interference under Article 136 of the Constitution is made out.
Special Leave Petition is dismissed.
-
2023 (6) TMI 1224 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - notice after a period of four years - disallowance of CSR expenditure - HELD THAT:- Explanation 1 will not be applicable as CSR expenditure was incurred as required by section 135 of the Companies Act, 2013 and its proposed disallowance would not constitute an offense.
It appears that there was no tangible material available on record to conclude that income had escaped assessment. The Apex Court in case of M.M. Aqua Technologies Ltd. [2021 (8) TMI 520 - SUPREME COURT] has held that a provision in the Act, which is “for removal of doubts” cannot be presumed to be retrospective even where such language is used, if it alters the law as it earlier stood; and even if it is assumed that the said amendment is retrospective, it cannot give rise to a failure on the part of the Petitioner to disclose fully and truly material facts as held by this Court in the case of Voltas Ltd. [2013 (4) TMI 116 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT]
AO has acted in excess of the limit of his jurisdiction to reopen the assessment in the exercise of powers under section 147 read with section 148 of the Act. Accordingly the Petitioner would be entitled to succeed.
-
2023 (6) TMI 1223 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Addition u/s 14A - Expenditure incurred in relation to income not includible in total income - Mandation of recording satisfaction - AO should record his dis-satisfaction with the correctness of the claim of the assessee in respect of the expenditure and to arrive at such dis-satisfaction he should give cogent reasons - HELD THAT:- AO does not say he is not satisfied and why he was not satisfied. There are no reasons given.
AO has relied upon some discussions and findings of some original assessment order passed, but the first assessment order ever to have been passed is the impugned order dated 28th March 2013 where the Assessing Officer has reduced the disallowance. Therefore, it only indicates clear non-application of mind by the Assessing Officer.
We would agree with the submissions of Ms Jain since CIT(A) in his order dated 9th December 2014 records “Though not mentioned in assessment order, admittedly a notice u/s 143(2) was issued and assessment proceedings were pending on the date of search which came to be abated. In response to notice u/s 153A dated 24.10.2011 appellant filed return of income on 29.1.2011 declaring Total income of Rs. 317,47,69,697/- and Book Profit u/s 115JB Rs. 666,76,27,404/- In the assessment order dated 28.3.2013 passed u/s 153A r.w.s. 143(3), the Assessing Officer has made certain additions/disallowance which are subject matter of this appeal”. Assessment order dated 28th March 2013 is the order that was impugned before the CIT(A). Therefore it clearly indicates that the AO’s finding in paragraph 5.2 of the assessment order is based relying upon a non-existent assessment order and that indicates clear non-application of mind.
-
2023 (6) TMI 1222 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Income taxable in India - Capital gain from Singapore as exempted in India - benefit of Article 13(4) of the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) between India and Singapore - assessee [tax resident of Singapore] Foreign Institutional Investor (FII) in debt segment with Securities and Exchange Board of India - HELD THAT:- The exemption or reduction of tax to be allowed under the DTAA in India shall only apply to so much of the income as is remitted to or received in Singapore where the laws in force in Singapore provides that the said income is subject to tax by reference to the amount which is remitted or received in Singapore. When under the laws in force in Singapore the income is subject to tax by reference to the full amount thereof, whether or not remitted to or received in Singapore, then in that case Article 24(1) would not apply.
AO while framing the draft assessment order has disallowed the benefit of Article 13(4) of DTAA on capital gain earned in India holding that provisions of Article 24 of DTAA speaks about the restriction of exemption of such capital gain to the extent of repatriation of such income to Singapore. AO has held that the assessee has not produced any evidence to show such required repatriation as mandated by Article 24 of DTAA for entitlement of exempted income. This is an incorrect statement as rightly held by the ITAT.
The assessee placed on record even before the AO a certificate dated 16th April 2012 from Singapore Tax Authorities certifying that the income derived by the assessee from buying and selling of Indian Debt Securities and from Foreign Exchange transactions in India would be considered under Singapore Taxes Law as accruing in or derived from Singapore and such income would be brought to tax in Singapore without reference to the amount remitted or received in Singapore.
Singapore authorities have themselves certified that the capital gain income would be brought to tax in Singapore without reference to the amount remitted or received in Singapore. The AO could not have come to a conclusion otherwise.
As stated in the circular No. 789 dated 13th April 2000, though it applied to Indo-Mauritius Double Tax Avoidance Convention with reference to certificate of residence, the purport and principle is clear. Such certificates issued by the Singapore Tax Authorities will constitute sufficient evidence for accepting the legal position. We see no reason to admit this appeal on this ground. No substantial questions of law arise
-
2023 (6) TMI 1221 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Reopening of assessment - absence of jurisdiction with the issuing authority for reopening - as alleged approval as required u/s 151 had not been obtained - four years had expired - scope of provisions of Section 151 came to be amended with effect from 01/04/2021 - HELD THAT:- The impugned notice is liable to be set aside on the ground of absence of jurisdiction with the issuing authority.
As decided in J M Financial and Investment Consultancy Services Private Limited [2022 (4) TMI 1446 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] since four years had expired from the end of the relevant assessment year, as provided under Section 151(1) of the Act, it is only the Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner or Commissioner who could have accorded the approval and not the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax.
As the stand taken by the respondents that by virtue of provisions of the Act of 2020, the approval of Assistant/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax as granted was valid has been turned down. In view of Section 151(1) of the Act of 1961 prior to its amendment it was only the Principal Chief Commissioner or the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax who could have accorded the approval. Thus a case for interference has been made out. Decided in favour of assessee.
-
2023 (6) TMI 1220 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Exemption u/s 11 - Receipt of voluntary contributions/corpus fund or capitation fee - AO held that there was violation under the KEI (Prohibition of Capitation Fee) Act, and accordingly, brought the money collected by the assessee to tax - ITAT deleted the additions - HELD THAT:- AO, based on assumption and surmise, has held that there was violation under the KEI (Prohibition of Capitation Fee) Act by the assessee and that incorrect assumption has been rightly reversed by the ITAT.
So far as the authority in New Noble Educational Society is concerned, the Apex Court [2022 (10) TMI 855 - SUPREME COURT] has held that the registration under different statues is also a relevant consideration while deciding the application for approval under Section 10(23C) of the Act.
In the case on hand, we are not dealing with a situation where the IT Department was considering any application for granting exemption. On the other hand, the department had issued the exemption certificate and the AO on an incorrect assumption has treated the money collected by the assessee as capitation fee under the KEI (Prohibition of Capitation Fee) Act. Therefore, the said authority does not lend any support to the Revenue. This court has already taken a view in Kammavari Sangham and the same is applicable to the facts of this case. Decided against revenue.
-
2023 (6) TMI 1219 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Defective notice - cessation/remission of liability u/s 41(1) - HELD THAT:- Penalty proceedings entail civil consequences for the assessee. The AO is required to apply his mind to the material particulars, and indicate clearly, as to what is being put against the respondent/assessee when triggering the penalty proceedings.
In case the AO concludes, that a case is made out under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, he needs to indicate, clearly, as to which limb of the said provision is attracted. The reason we say so is, that apart from anything else, the pecuniary burden may vary, depending on the infraction(s) committed by the respondent/assessee. In a given case, where concealment has taken place, a heavier burden may be imposed, than in a situation where an assessee is involved in furnishing inaccurate particulars.
Therefore, it is necessary for the AO to indicate, broadly, as to the provision/limb under which penalty proceedings are triggered against the assessee.Clearly, this has not happened in the instant case.
As a matter of fact, even in the assessment order, whereby proceedings were triggered, there is no indication whatsoever, as to which limb of Section 271(1)(c) of the Act was triggered. Decided in favour of assessee.
-
2023 (6) TMI 1218 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Territorial jurisdiction of this High Court - HELD THAT:- As since the AO who framed the assessment is located in Gurugram, of the Supreme Court rendered in CIT v. ABC Papers Ltd [2022 (8) TMI 863 - SUPREME COURT] the instant appeals will not lie in the present High Court.
Accordingly, liberty is sought to withdraw the appeals and file the same before the Court which would have territorial jurisdiction in the matter. Leave in that behalf is granted.
The appellant/revenue is given eight weeks to file the appeals. The time to file the appeals will commence from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.
-
2023 (6) TMI 1217 - ITAT CHENNAI
TDS u/s 194H - Discount or Commission - Demand u/s. 201(1) / 201(1A) - credit notes and gold coins offered on annual rebate to selected dealers upon achieving targets - assessee submitted that credit notes were given in order to promote the sales - AO held that such credits were in the nature of commission which would require TDS - HELD THAT:- For applicability of TDS obligation u/s 194H, there should exist agency relationship between the payer and the payee. The payee should act as on agent for the assessee. From the fact, it emerges that the assessee sells its products through network of dealers / distributors under a commercial agreement.
As per the terms, the risk and rewards of sale transaction pass on to these dealers at the point of time of sale only. The assessee merely regulates business terms for the purpose of sale. Nevertheless, the sale happens on principal-to-principal basis only.
Fixed rebates are generally reduced from the invoice and only net sale consideration is shown in the financial statements. Variable rebates are based on sales quantity or on achievement of sales targets - Dealers / distributors do not act on behalf of the assessee rather they act on independent basis subject to business terms laid down by the assessee.
The risk and reward of goods get transferred at the time of sale by assessee to these dealers. The documents as placed on record substantiate all these facts.
The decision in the case of CIT vs. Ahmedabad Stamp Vendors Association [2012 (9) TMI 298 - SC ORDER] supports the case of the assessee as held that discount given to stamp vendors for purchasing stamps in bulk quantity was in the nature of cash discount in transaction of sale and, therefore, section 194H would have no application to that transaction.There was no obligation on assessee to deduct TDS on rebates given on transaction of sale. Accordingly, impugned demand, for both the years, stands deleted. Decided in favour of assessee.
-
2023 (6) TMI 1216 - ITAT DELHI
Nature of receipts - non-refundable security deposits received by appellant - nature of security deposits - revenue or capital receipt - As per AO security deposits are not shown as advance receivables at the asset side nor shown as liability towards customers in the balance-sheet of M/s Silver Line Holdings Pvt. Ltd. and that without passing the amount through its account M/s Silver Line Holdings Pvt. Ltd. transferred the same to the assessee, thus has to be considered to be non-refundable - HELD THAT:- In the light of various clauses of Tripartite agreement and the agreement between the assessee and SHL discussed above it is established that both the companies were operating in different fields of the project. The rights in the land vested with SHL along with other subsidiaries and they were transferred in favour of any buyer of Villa/ Units and qua service or amenities of Gold Course, SHL was separately charging non-refundable deposits. It was responsibility of SHL to account for the same in books for which assessee cannot be faulted.
Ld. tax authorities below have completely ignored the corrigendum agreement dated 29.09.2009, considering the same to be self serving ignoring that other clauses of tripartite Buyer’s agreement and agreement between assessee and SHL dated 24.12.2008 were themselves clear of the fact that what assessee was getting was something in the form of refundable deposit .
CIT(Appeals) has rightly concluded non-refundable security deposits received by appellant has nexus with O&M services provided to the clients. However, he failed to appreciate that in the hands of assessee the same were refundable and merely as means to finance O&M services. Thus, the same were not of revenue nature receipts.
Apart from above, there is also force in the contention of learned AR that the Coordinate Bench in assessee’s own case, [2019 (7) TMI 1434 - ITAT DELHI], has considered the nature of deposits in the hands of assessee as refundable security deposits, as one of the possible view as decided in favour of assessee.
-
2023 (6) TMI 1215 - ITAT MUMBAI
Estimation of income - Bogus purchases - communication received from the DDIT(Inv) with regard to the information received from sales-tax department, as per which, the assessee is involved in taking bogus entries towards purchases - CIT(A) given partial relief only to the extent of 50% of the amount reflected in the stock register - HELD THAT:- We notice that there are certain discrepancies in the figures considered by the CIT(A) for the purpose of disallowance and the figures as per assessee's stock register.
CIT(A) did not call for any remand report from the AO with regard to the additional evidences submitted by the assessee and there is per se violation of Rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules, 1962.
The issue should go back to the AO for fresh verification of the evidences submitted by the assessee. Accordingly we remit the issue for a fresh verification to the AO with a direction to consider the reconciliation statement of the stock register prepared by the assessee and also to keep in mind the decision of Mohammed Haji Adam & Co [2019 (2) TMI 1632 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] as held that profit embedded in the sale of bogus purchases can only be added since the AO in the instant case as noted has not disturbed the sales figures shown by the assessee and decide accordingly. Needless to say that the assessee be given an opportunity of being heard. Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose.
-
2023 (6) TMI 1214 - ITAT DEHRADUN
Assessment u/s 153A - belated filing of returns - statutory time limit provided for filing the returns of income in response to notice under section 153A - HELD THAT:- When a search is initiated, the assessee is not required to file his return till such time he receives notice u/s 153A of the Act. Once such notice is received, the liability fastens on the assessee to file the return within the reasonable time specified in the relevant notice.
As the revised return filed by the assessee for the assessment years 2011-12 to 2016-17 are invalid returns and have to be declared non-est, for the reason that these are nothing but revising of belated returns filed on 13.06.2018. Hence, the entire additional incomes offered by the assessee in the revised returns filed on 13.12.2018 for assessment years 2011-12 to 2016-17 cannot be taxed at all in the relevant assessment years as it had been offered in the invalid and non-est revised return.
Addition made towards unsecured loans u/s 68 and consequential disallowance of interest on such loans - Admittedly, there is absolutely no incriminating material found during the course of search for assessment years 2011-12 to 2015-16 in respect of making addition made towards unsecured loans under section 68 of the Act and consequential disallowance of interest on such loans. Hence, the earlier assessment years for assessment years 2011-12 to 2015-16 cannot be disturbed at all by learned AO while framing the search assessments under section 153A of the Act.
This issue is no longer res integra in view of the recent decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of PCIT Vs. Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd [2023 (4) TMI 1056 - SUPREME COURT] wherein the decision of Kabul Chawla [2015 (9) TMI 80 - DELHI HIGH COURT] has been upheld by the Hon’ble Apex Court. Hence, in view of the same, all the additions made by learned AO in the search assessments for assessment years 2011- 12 to 2015-16 are hereby directed to be deleted.
In view of our earlier observations made that the revised returns filed by the assessee for the assessment years 2011-12 to 2015-16 on 13.12.2018 are invalid and non-est, the income to be determined for assessment years 2011-12 to 2015-16.
-
2023 (6) TMI 1213 - ITAT MUMBAI
Unexplained cash credits u/s. 68 - share application money received by the assessee - Assessee failed to establish the genuineness and creditworthiness of the investing companies - CIT-A deleted the addition - HELD THAT:- Apart from making bald allegations, the Revenue did not bring any such material on record to substantiate its claim.
As in respect of all the 5 companies the Revenue has conducted scrutiny assessment in the preceding years. A mere isolated transaction by one of the alleged entry operators in one of the investor companies does not taint the entire share transaction in the assessee company in the absence of any corroborative material being brought on record. Further, we find that the funds were received, inter-alia, from the sale of equity shares of some other companies by these investors or from the refund of advances for the purchase of shares.
Thus,we find no merit in the aforesaid submission of the learned DR. Therefore, from the above it is evident that the assessee has also proved the source of source of the investors in the present case to satisfy the test of creditworthiness of the investor and genuineness of the transaction, against which no contrary material has been brought on record. - Decided against revenue.
-
2023 (6) TMI 1212 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
Exemption u/s. 11 - Charitable activity u/s 2(15) - Assessee trust is an autonomous body which is established under 5/2 of the Gujarat Town Planning and Urban Development Act, 1976 made there under carrying Planned Development of areas as defined and designed by the Government of Gujarat and also infrastructural activities relating thereto such as construction of roads, bridges, drainage system, water connection for the benefit of public at large - HELD THAT:- We hold that the activities of the assessee for advancement of any other object of ‘General Public Utility’ for charitable purpose and therefore the assessee corporation shall be entitled to exemption u/s. 11 of the Act.
Hon’ble Supreme Court in ACIT vs. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority [2022 (11) TMI 255 - SUPREME COURT] wherein it has been clearly held that the Revenues Appeals are dismissed as far as statutory Corporations/Boards - Decided in favour of assessee.
-
2023 (6) TMI 1211 - ITAT DELHI
TP adjustment - ALP of the international transactions relating to merchanting trades - what should be the PLI of the assessee qua the PLI of the comparables? - only variation made by the TPO to the PLI of the assessee is to add the cost of goods to the denominator - HELD THAT:- Admittedly, in the TP study report, the assessee had furnished segmental information regarding both the merchanting trades segment and physical trade segment. TPO has also accepted the segmental analysis of the assessee. In fact, he has accepted the transactions in trading segment to be at ALP.
As discussed earlier, the only variation, he has made in merchanting trades segment, is in relation to PLI of the assessee. Thus, neither the TPO nor DRP have made any adverse comment regarding the merchanting trades segment.
When there is no allegation either by RBI or any other regulatory authority regarding merchanting trades segment of the assessee, in our view, DR cannot give a new dimension to the entire issue by making allegations which are not borne out on record.
DR cannot improve upon the case of the TPO or learned DRP by enlarging the scope of the appeal. Thus, considering the fact that in the PLI of the comparables, cost of goods is not included in the denominator, in our view, the same would also apply to the assessee. Hence, cost of goods cannot form part of the denominator of PLI. Accordingly, we direct the Assessing Officer to compute the ALP by applying PLI of operating profit to value added cost, excluding the cost of goods. Grounds are allowed.
............
|
