|
Advanced Search Options
Income Tax - Case Laws
Showing 161 to 180 of 503 Records
-
2013 (1) TMI 812 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ch arises in this case is whether the income arising on the sale of land is to be treated as sale of stock in trade and charged under the head 'income from business' or as sale of investment charged under the head of 'capital gains'. 3 The finding of fact recorded by the CIT(A) and upheld by the tribunal is that a) the respondent company has been disclosing the land in its books of accounts as a investment and not as stock in trade; b) The land sold was held for a period of 10 years by the respondent assessee; and c) No steps were taken for development of property by the respondent assessee during the period it held the land. 4 In the above circumstances, decision of the Tribunal based on concurrent finding of fact recorded by the CIT(A) and by the Tribunal does not raise any question of law. This is particularly so as the revenue has not urged that the concurrent finding of fact are perverse. 5 Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed, with no order as to costs.
-
2013 (1) TMI 811 - ITAT HYDERABAD
Profit estimation - re-determine the sale price - whether the notice was issued under S.153A or under S.153C - gain on the debt assignment gets set off by the loss in the sale of shares - assuming jurisdiction under S.153C
-
2013 (1) TMI 810 - ITAT RAJKOT
order u/s.263 - Applicability of section 40 (a)(ia) - Deduction of TDS - As per assessee TDS was required to be deducted and deposited into Govt. A/c. by 31.03.2006 - Deposit in Govt. A/c. was made much later i.e. on 05-10-2006 instead on before 31.03.2006 - As per Ao it is not clear that whether such tax was deducted at source out of the amounts paid/credited by the assessee - Hence Ao disallowed the same - this issue is restored to AO - Reasonable opportunity of hearing shall be given by the AO to the assessee - Matter remanded back
Held that:- Appeal filed by the assessee is barred by limitation - assessee has applied for condonation of delay - The period of delay is nominal of 09 days - In case of Vedabai alias Vaijayanatabai Baburao Patil v. Shantaram Baburao Patil [[2002] 253 ITR 798 / 122] - it has been held that pragmatic approach should be adopted while exercising discretion in condoning delay but a distinction must be made between a case where the delay is inordinate and a case where the delay is of a few days - thus the delay is condoned - decided in favor of assessee
-
2013 (1) TMI 809 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Disallowance of ₹ 6,62,50,000/- u/s. 14A - Interest expenditure - Held that:- there has to be nexus between the borrowed fund and investment made and the same can be established only when it is shown that interest free funds were not available with the assessee - there was sufficient interest free funds available with the assessee and Department failed to establish the link between the borrowed fund and the investment made by the assessee in the equity shares, addition made on account of disallowance of ₹ 6,62,50,000/- by AO has been deleted - assessee had not used borrowed funds, for the purpose of investment in equity shares - Tribunal has allowed the interest free expenses incurred for earning the dividend and allowed the deduction under Section 80M
-
2013 (1) TMI 808 - ITAT HYDERABAD
Delay in filing the appeal - Held that:- assessee was under the bonafide belief that no appeal need to be filed against the order of CIT till reassessment is made - On the facts of the case it is deemed fit in the interest of justice to condone the delay of 26 days - Decided in favor of assessee
Whether TDS deducted on professional charges and interest charges - levy interest u/s.201(IA) - Held that:- The scope of the order u/s.263 is restricted to the income and expenditure in computation of taxable income - The failure to deduct tax at source and levy of interest there on are to be considered under separate provisions - Thus AO cannot levy interest u/s.201(IA) - Decided in favor of assessee
Interest income on loans advanced by the assessee to M/s. Adarsh Developers (P) Ltd - Held that:- As per the agreement a coupon rate of 4% p.a for he first quarter was decided - Such interest is subject to TDS - The borrower co. invested the amount in share capital of another co. - the assessee co. has not derived any interest from M/s Adarsh Developers Pvt. Ltd and no interest has been provided in its books - the order of CIT is to be setaside - decided in favor of assessee
Disallowance of ₹ 5,35,748/- as factory maintenance - Held that:- assessee acquired a property in auction - incurred expenditure of ₹ 5,35,000 as maintenance of plant and machinery - assessee had neither produced any evidence regarding such expense - issue is set aside for reconsidering the allowability of expenditure - remanded bck
-
2013 (1) TMI 807 - ITAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... s. It is not the case of the Revenue that the receipts shown by the assessee are not fully recorded or the same are not genuine. The A.O. without considering this aspect of the matter has enhanced the receipts of the assessee by 20 of the expenses incurred by the assessee without bringing any supporting material on record. Since the issue has not been examined properly, we are of the view that, in the interest of justice, the matter should go back to the file of the A.O. and accordingly we set aside the order passed by the Revenue authorities on this account and send back the matter to the file of the A.O. to decide the same afresh in the light of our observations hereinabove and according to law after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The ground taken by the assessee is, therefore, partly allowed for statistical purpose. 8. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced on 31-01-2013
-
2013 (1) TMI 806 - ITAT MUMBAI
Determination of Arms length price - whether closing stock to be included in calculation of operating profit margin - Held that:- It is impermissible to add up figure of closing stock without giving effect to the figure of opening stock - Thus TPO is erred in computing operating profit - Remanded back for calculation of correct operating profit margin
Disallowance of PF and ESIC dues - paid beyond the due date under respective Acts but before the due date of filing the return - Held that:- since the amount is deposited before the due date of filing the return of income u/s 139(1) it cannot be disallowed - Decided in fravor of assessee
-
2013 (1) TMI 805 - ITAT DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... ble on facts and hence not applicable. 33. In view of above discussions it is held that penalty u/s section 271(1)(c) is not imposable on the facts and in the circumstances of case discussed in detail as above. Explanation 5 is not applicable for the reasons mentioned above in our decision. Therefore, ld. CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. The assessing officer is, therefore, directed to delete the penalty.” 9. This Order in ‘Prem Arora’ (supra) was followed in ‘Kiran Grover’ (supra). 10. It remains undisputed that the facts in the present appeals are the same as in ‘Prem Arora’ (supra) and ‘Kiran Grover’ (supra). Therefore, following these decisions of the co-ordinate Benches of the Tribunal, the Orders under appeal are set aside and the penalty is deleted. 11. In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed. The order pronounced in the open court on 24.01.2013.
-
2013 (1) TMI 804 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Additions on account of adjustment made to arms length price in respect of international transactions - Held that:- similar question raised by the Revenue in the Assessee's own case being Income Tax Appeal No. 6869 of 2010 - thus adjustment made to arms length price cannot be entertained
Deletion of addition being interest receivable on outstanding amount - Held that:- interest income is associated only with the lending or borrowing of money and not in case of sale - the specific finding of the ITAT is that there is complete uniformity in the act of the assessee in not charging interest from both the Associated Enterprises and Non Associated Enterprises debtors and the delay in realisation of the export proceeds in both the cases is same - hence there is no reason to entertain the matter - Appeal is accordingly dismissed with no order
-
2013 (1) TMI 803 - ITAT MUMBAI
Legal validity of additions made under section 153A - Held that:- Additions in the assessments made under section 153A could be made only on the basis of incriminating material found during the search, except in cases where assessment has abated - here no proceedings are abated thus no addition could be made unless some incriminating material was found - addition made on the facts of case are legally invalid - Decided in favor of assessee
-
2013 (1) TMI 802 - ITAT MUMBAI
Whether deduction under section 10A or brought forward losses and unabsorbed depreciation shall first be allowed from business income - Held that:- Section 10A is a provision which is in the nature of a deduction and not an exemption - The deduction under section 10A has to be given effect to at the stage of computing the profits and gains of business - Hence it is clear that exemption under section 10A, is to be allowed without setting off carry forward unabsorbed losses and the depreciation from the earlier AY or current AY Decided in favor of assessee
-
2013 (1) TMI 801 - ITAT HYDERABAD
TPA - selection of comparable - Held that:- Assessee is a service provider operating with limited or no risk at all thus companies functionally dissimilar with that of assessee need to be excluded from final list of comparable.
Deduction under s. 10A - Held that:- We direct the AO to recompute the deduction under s. 10A after reducing communication charges both from the export turnover as well as the total turnover.
-
2013 (1) TMI 800 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... nfirmed by the CIT(Appeals). However, with respect to the rest, the same was deleted. The Tribunal concurred with such view of CIT (Appeals). Several additions were struck down in the assessment proceeding itself and were sent for reconsideration. With respect to disallowance of deduction under section 80IA of the Act, the authorities held that the claim cannot be stated to be a wrong claim. Relying on the decision in the case of CIT v. Reliance Petroproducts (P.) Ltd. 2010 322 ITR 158/189 Taxman 322 (SC), such penalty was deleted. 4. To our mind, the entire issue is based on appreciation of facts. Substantial portion of the penalty deleted arose on account of additions not being sustained. To the limited extent such penalty related disallowance of claim of deduction under section 80IA of the Act, by virtue of decision in the case of Reliance Petroproducts (P.) Ltd., (supra), penalty could not have been imposed. No question of law arises. Tax Appeal is, therefore, dismissed.
-
2013 (1) TMI 798 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
... ...
... ... ..... we confirm this disallowance of ₹ 42,790/-. 9. Regarding the Tribunal’s decision cited by the learned AR of the assessee rendered in the case of Kamal Madmohan Mangaldas, (supra), we find that in that case, it is noted by the Tribunal in Para 8 of the order that the non-taxable income is reflected in assessee’s personal profit & loss account and he has not claimed any expense against the same. In the present case, even the dividend income is credited in the profit & loss account of the assessee company and therefore, this Tribunal’s decision is not applicable in the present case because facts are different. Ground No.2 of the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed. 10. Ground No.3 of the assessee’s appeal is same as ground No.2 and, therefore, ground No.3 is rejected, since the issue is already decided as per ground No.2. 11. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 31-01-2013.
-
2013 (1) TMI 797 - ITAT MUMBAI
Determination of arms length price - Nature of Business - whether support services or merchant banking - Selection of comparables to determine ALP - International transaction like consultancy Services, reimbursement of expense, recovery of expenses incurred and receipt of share application money - Held that:- TPO has rejected the comparables selected by the assessee on the ground that the activities of the assessee are of investment advisory services and not of support services.
Held that:- The primary role of the assessee is limited to collecting information, providing recommendations and advice on the basis of information collected - assessee has no functional, asset and business risk - assessee has no role in transfer of funds or investment in India - assessee has located the comparables which are in similar activity of advisory/support services - assessee is providing only advisory services and support services to its AE, who in turn takes a decision for potential investment - It is that the assesse’s role is only to furnish the requisite information and not to participate in the actual decision making - Comparables selected by assessee are correct - Decided in favor of assessee
Held that:- As regards to the adjustment of +/-5% can be made when some real and accurate effect of such differences are brought on record - assessee has not properly quantified the alleged adjustments on account of differences in asset employed and risk assumed - Decided against the assessee
-
2013 (1) TMI 796 - ITAT MUMBAI
Nature of Fees for technical services - Held that:- The assessee co. is incorporated in Hongkong and belongs to the CLSA Group of companies - amount in question received by the assessee company from CLSA India Ltd. - It was contended that the said contribution was paid towards reimbursement of various indirect overhead expenses incurred by the assessee company without any markup or service charges and the same being recovery of the overhead expenses actually incurred by the assessee company without any profit element, the same did not constitute income of the assessee company - the additional evidence filed by the assessee is very much relevant for deciding the issue under consideration - matter is remitted to CIT (Appeals) in order to give an opportunity to the learned CIT (Appeals) to verify the additional evidence and decide the issue afresh on such verification - Matter remanded back for statistical purposes
Addition made on account of referral fees treating it in the nature of fees for technical services - whether the referral fees received by the assessee who is a non-resident in India from CLSAI is chargeable to tax in India - Held that:- there was no business income in India of the applicant u/s 9(1)(i) nor even the deemed income as per Explanation 2 to sec 9(1)(i) - the referral fees paid by the Indian company was not fees for technical services u/s 9(1)(vii) - the referral fees received by the assessee is not taxable in India as per the case of Cushman and Wakefield (S) Pet. Ltd. (supra) - addition made by the AO and confirmed by the CIT on this issue is deleted - Decided in favor of assessee
-
2013 (1) TMI 795 - ITAT MUMBAI
Determination of Arms length price of transaction - Held that:- TPO rejected twelve out of 16 comparables submitted by the assessee and injected its own eleven comparables - also TPO removed bank interest, discounting and finance charges to arrive at the operating margin - also he included domestic transactions in turnover for calculation of ALP - Hence the case is referred back to AO as only the export transaction, i.e. the international transaction is considered for the purposes of determining the ALP - Also foreign exchange fluctuation gain is nothing but an integral part of the sale proceeds of an assessee carrying on export business thus the same shall be included in revenues - On the issue of exclusion of discount chargesit is held that they cannot form part of the operating cost, as they shall fall under the ambit of non operating expenses - Thus TPO shall determine the ALP afresh as per the proviso to section 92C(2) - Remanded back for statistical purposes
-
2013 (1) TMI 794 - ITAT BANGALORE
Determination of Arm's length Price - Held that:- assessee adopted transaction net margin method (TNMM)to determine the ALP - TPO however rejected the assessee’s objections and selected 26 external companies as comparables - In the case of software services rendered by the appellant to its AE the functions performed by the appellant were the same as those performed by unrelated parties (Non-AEs) - internal” TNMM was selected as the most appropriate method - internal comparables are more appropriate and are to be given precedence over external comparables - The computation of arm’s length price in case of TNMM is done as per Rule 10B(1)(e) - assessee had also filed detailed functional similarity as well as the methodology of apportionment of expenses - TPO to adopt the internal TNMM instead of external TNMM - TPO to verify the cost allocation and the PLI and margin computation of software services rendered by the assessee to its AE - Remanded back for statistical purposes
Deduction u/s 10A - computed the business loss - Held that:- deduction under section 10A is undertaking specific and should be computed without considering the losses of other industrial units, which is a non-STP unit - Decided in favor of assessee
-
2013 (1) TMI 793 - ITAT DELHI
Whether addition made u/s 68 on unsecured loans are bogus - Held that:- The assessee had filed before the authority the confirmations of bank account - creditors of the assesses are existing asseseess of the department having permanent account numbers - money has been received by cheque thus genuineness of transaction has been rightly accepted - hence the assessee has satisfactorily discharged its onus in establishing the genuineness of the claimed credit - Decided against the revenue
-
2013 (1) TMI 792 - ITAT PUNE
Disallowance of depreciation on wind mills - Denial of rate of depreciation @80% - Held that:- Assessee has incurred the expenditure on foundation/civil work and erection and commissioning work and claimed depreciation at 80% on this - cost of foundation is the integral part of the wind mill and same is eligible for depreciation at the rate which is applicable to the wind mill - Decided in favor of assessee
............
|
