|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 201 to 220 of 994 Records
-
2013 (4) TMI 801 - ITAT DELHI
Addition u/s 40(a)(ia) - Held that:- Provisions of Section 40(a) (ia) have been held to be not applicable. See ITO Versus Finian Estates Developers (P) Ltd. [2012 (6) TMI 705 - ITAT, Delhi ]- Assessee having appointed a consolidator to acquire land who, as per the terms of MOU, agreed to assign its right to purchase the land in favour of the assessee
-
2013 (4) TMI 800 - ITAT COCHIN
... ...
... ... ..... nd perused the record. Admittedly, the AO did not discuss about the explanations, if any, called for from the assessee with regard to the claim of low expenses. The natural justice calls for providing necessary opportunity of being heard to the assessee in order to explain his case before taking any adverse decision against the assessee. It was not shown to us that the assessee was given an opportunity by the assessing officer with regard to this issue. Accordingly, in our view, the assessee should be given necessary opportunity in this regard. Accordingly, we set aside the order of Ld CIT(A) on this issue and restore the same to the file of the assessing officer with the direction to examine the issue afresh by providing necessary opportunity of being heard to the assessee and thereafter decide the issue in accordance with the law. 16. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes. Pronounced accordingly on 26-04-2013.
-
2013 (4) TMI 799 - ITAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... the loan transaction through banking channel. 5.4 On the other hand, the Learned DR has objected to the admission of the additional evidence as the same was not produced before the AO. 6. We have considered the rival submission as well as material on record. The AO disallowed the loan ₹ 1 lac for want of confirmation the assessee filed the confirmation before the CIT (A) but was not accepted. It is pertinent to note that transaction of the loan is through banking channel and the loan creditor has confirmed the loan transaction then this document is material relevant evidence for deciding the issue. 7. We find that the assessee has prima facie has proved the transaction by way of confirmation and bank statement showing the loan transaction. Therefore, we admit the additional evidence and direct the AO to verify the same and then decide the issue as per law. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. Order pronounced on this 26th Day of April, 2013.
-
2013 (4) TMI 798 - ITAT CHENNAI
Depreciation claim by assessee trust - Held that:- Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Vegetable Products Ltd. (1973 (1) TMI 1 - SUPREME Court ) where the Apex Court has held that when different views are available on the subject, the views favourable to the assessee should be adopted. It is in the light of the above legal pronouncement that the Tribunal has held that the assessee can claim depreciation even though capital expenditure have been treated as application of funds for charitable purposes.
-
2013 (4) TMI 797 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
... ...
... ... ..... a speaking order after considering the case laws cited by the assessee at the time of hearing before the Bench. However, the learned AR had pointed before us that there was other relevant factual and legal issues discussed in the written submission placed before the Bench and the same were not considered by the Bench in its order. On perusing the written submission we find the submission of the learned AR has merit. Since certain factual and legal aspects discussed in the written submissions were not argued before the bench at the time of hearing the same was not taken note off by the bench while writing the order. Therefore it appears that a mistake has occurred in the order of the Tribunal and to rectify the same we hereby recall our order with respect to the limited issue to be adjudicated by virtue of the order in MA No.87/Ahd/2012 dated 06-07-2012. 5. In the result, the Misc. Application filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 12-04-2013.
-
2013 (4) TMI 796 - ITAT PUNE
... ...
... ... ..... pervision expenses in respect of F.Y. 2003-04 and 2004-05 crystallised vide letter dated 11.10.2005 of M.P.R.D.C. Though this letter was produced before the Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings, inter alia stated that the Corporation has demanded supervision charges ₹ 16,60,500/- for F.Y. 2003-04 and as supervision continued during F.Y. 2004-05, therefore liability for payment of ₹ 33,21,000/- in fact crystallised vide letter dated 11.10.2005 which was received during the previous year relevant to assessment year. Therefore, the CIT(A) held that claim was allowable under consideration. This reasoned finding of CIT(A) whereby he has held allowable to be crystallised in the year under consideration on the basis of letter dated 11.10.2005 is justified which needs no interference from our side. Accordingly same is upheld. 9. As a result, appeal filed by the assessee Revenue is dismissed. Pronounced in the open court on this the 29th day of April, 2013.
-
2013 (4) TMI 795 - ITAT PUNE
Depreciation - 'License/right to collect Toll' is an Intangible Asset u/s Section 32(1)(ii) or not - Assessee was a consortium of two companies, with the object of developing the infrastructure project of construction of Takli-Kasegaon-Anawali Road on Build, Operate and Transfer (BOT) basis for the Government of Maharasthra. He capitalised the cost incurred in the development and construction of the said project under the head ‘License to collect toll’. Further, in the return of income, assessee claimed depreciation @ 25% following section 32(1)(ii). - CIT(A) allowed the claim of depreciation - HELD THAT: - 'Right to collect the Toll’ is emerging as a result of the costs incurred by the assessee on development, construction and maintenance of the infrastructure facility. Such a right falls within the purview of section 32(1)(ii) .i.e 'License/right to collect Toll' is an Intangible Asset, thus, found eligible to claim depreciation.
Decision in the case of Ashoka Info (P) ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax. [2008 (12) TMI 271 - ITAT PUNE-B] relied upon.
Revenue appeal dismissed.
-
2013 (4) TMI 794 - ITAT HYDERABAD
... ...
... ... ..... 10.2010 for Assessment years 2003-04 to 2006- 07 in ITA No.1050 to 1053/Hyd/2009. A copy each of the above orders of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for earlier years have been furnished by the assessee in the paper-book filed before us. In the first of the above decisions, being dated 8.10.2010 for assessment years 2003-04 to 2006-07 noted against (b) above, the Tribunal followed the decision of the Tribunal dated 5.6.2009 in the case of Nyse Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. V/s. DCIT for assessment year 2005-06 in ITA No.301/Hyd/2009. Respectfully following the consistent view taken by the Tribunal in assessee’s own cases for earlier years, as noted above, we find no infirmity in the impugned order of the CIT(A), which in fact, has followed the said orders of the Tribunal. We accordingly uphold the same, rejecting the grounds raised by the Revenue in this appeal. 6. In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. Order pronounced in the court on 5th April, 2013
-
2013 (4) TMI 793 - ITAT MUMBAI
Disallowance of expenditure - expenditure subject to FBT - Held that:- As in the case of Hansraj Mathuradas [2012 (10) TMI 300 - ITAT, MUMBAI] relying upon CBDT Circular No.8/2005 dated 29/8/2005 it was held that once FBT is levied on expenses incurred, it follows that the same are treated as fringe benefit provided by the assessee as employer to its employees and the same have to be appropriately allowed as expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively by the assessee for the purpose of its business. No contrary decision has been brought to our notice in this regard. Therefore, respectfully following the aforementioned decision we hold that if the aforementioned expenditure were subjected to FBT, then disallowance cannot be made. However, to verify that whether or not these expenditure were subjected to FBT, we restore the issues raised in these appeals to the file of AO with a direction to verify the contention of the assessee that whether or not impugned expenditure were subjected to FBT. If those expenditure were subjected to FBT then no disallowance can be made and the claim of the assessee should be accepted in its entirety.
-
2013 (4) TMI 792 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e had agreed to take such a stand to avoid any litigation. He however held a belief that the said income was not chargeable to tax as a deemed dividend. Creation of a trust and settlement of the shares in such trust were also mentioned in such communication. It was stated that the authority had expressed the opinion that since there was no financial transaction in the name of the trust and that the trust was not registered, it would not be possible to accept that the shares were settled in the said trust. It was for these reasons that the income was being surrendered. 14. In our opinion, the entire issue is based on appreciation of materials on record. Upon consideration of various factors if the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the trust was genuine and that the view of the revenue authorities that the same was never acted upon was not correct, such findings cannot be stated to be perverse so as to give rise a the question of law. In the result, Tax Appeal is dismissed.
-
2013 (4) TMI 791 - ITAT DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... ciation arose in the AY 1997-98 to 2001-02 only against the income under the head “profits and gains of business or profession”. However, the AO shall be entitled to allow set off of unabsorbed depreciation pertaining upto the AY 1996-97 against income under any head for a maximum period of eight years starting from AY 1997-98. The AO may allow set off of unabsorbed depreciation pertaining to the AY 2002-03 onwards against income under any head. The AO shall examine the assessee’s claim of unabsorbed depreciation and shall ascertain the relevant assessment years in which the unabsorbed depreciation had arisen, and then decide the matter in the light of our observation made above after following the decision of the Special Bench in the case of DCIT Vs. Times Guaranty Limited (supra). We direct accordingly. 15. In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed in the manner as indicated above. Decision pronounced in the open Court on 29th April, 2011.
-
2013 (4) TMI 790 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... following the view taken by this court in the aforesaid judgment, dismissed the appeal by affirming the order passed by the learned DC (A). Hence, this revision petition. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner-Department, submitted that the driver of the vehicle was not carrying the necessary documents and that seal of check-post was not affirmed and the penalty was rightly imposed. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner-Department and after going through the material on record, it is found that the facts of the instant case are squarely covered with the facts of the aforesaid judgment in the case State of Rajasthan v. Tajiander Pal 2003 6 Tax Up-Date 84 and the aforesaid judgment is fully applicable to the facts of the present case. In the light of the aforesaid judgment, I do not find any merit in this revision petition and the same is dismissed as no error, illegality or perversity has been committed in the order impugned passed by the Tax Board.
-
2013 (4) TMI 789 - ITAT LUCKNOW
Addition on account of unpaid liability of Service Tax u/s 43B - Held that:- Undisputedly the assessee has been following mercantile system of accounting and the liability of Service Tax is required to be paid only on the value of taxable service after its actual receipt in a particular month or quarter, as the case may be, and not on the amount billed by the assessee on the customers. It is also undisputed fact that Service Tax was not passed through profit & loss account nor was taken as part of income. The similar situation was examined by the Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs. Real Image Media Technologies (P) Ltd. (2007 (12) TMI 263 - ITAT MADRAS-C) and the Tribunal came to the conclusion that since the Service Tax was not payable by the assessee, the rigour of the provision of Section 43B could not be applied to the facts of the case. -Decided in favour of assessee.
-
2013 (4) TMI 788 - ITAT ALLAHABAD
Disallowance of freight and transportation expense and building repair and maintenance - addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of sale incentives - Value of fringe benefit on account of sale incentive being 20% - applicability of 115WB(2)(D)
-
2013 (4) TMI 787 - ITAT LUCKNOW
... ...
... ... ..... e mentioned in section 36(1)(va) of the Act. He was also of the view that the amount deducted has been deposited before the due date of filing of the return of income, hence no disallowance u/s 43B can be made. 3. Aggrieved, the Revenue has preferred the appeal before the Tribunal and placed reliance upon the assessment order. 4. We have carefully examined the order of the authorities in the light of the relevant provisions of the Act in the case of CIT vs. Manoj Kumar Singh 2012 349 ITR 230 in which their Lordships have held that the payment of employees contribution in respect of GPF, GIS and PF if paid after due date but before the filing of the return will be deductible u/s 43B of the Act. Since the order of the CIT(A) appears to be in consonance with the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court, we find no infirmity in his order. We accordingly confirm the same. 5. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. (Order pronounced in the open court on 25/04/2013)
-
2013 (4) TMI 786 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... n the parties. The assessee had full authority and also responsibility to develop the housing project by not only putting up the construction but by carrying out various other activities including enrolling members, accepting members, carrying out modifications engaging professional agencies and so on. Most significantly, the risk element was entirely that of the assessee. The land owner agreed to accept only a fixed price for the land in question. The assessee agreed to pay off the land owner first before appropriating any part of the sale consideration of the housing units for his benefit. In short, assessee took the full risk of executing the housing project and thereby making profit or loss as the case may be. The assessee invested its own funds in the cost of construction and engagement of several agencies. Land owner would receive a fix predetermined amount towards the price of land and was thus insulated against any risk.” In the result, Tax Appeal is dismissed.
-
2013 (4) TMI 785 - ITAT DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... confined and narrowed definition to ‘aeroplane’. This conclusion is also supported by the fact that other entries in Rule III(3) of the depreciation table extend to entire vehicles such as commercially pliable buses, cars etc. They do not confine the scope of depreciation only to parts of such vehicles. Thus this Court is satisfied that the Tribunal’s judgment does not disclose any error as regards interpretation of Entry III(3)(i) of the Depreciation Rules. Its upholding the depreciation allowable in the present case to the tune of 40 cannot be termed as unjustified or unwarranted.” 5. Respectfully following the above decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court as well as ITAT, we do not find any justification to interfere with the order of learned CIT(A). The same is sustained and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed. 6. In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed. Decision pronounced in the open Court on 26th April, 2013.
-
2013 (4) TMI 784 - ITAT MUMBAI
Principle of Mutuality - No one can make profit out of himself - Deduction for Co-operative Societies u/s 80P - Assessee is a co-operative housing society and has derived income by way of interest from Co.op. Bank, S.B. Account and fixed deposit. Assessee claimed deduction from such income u/s 80P of the Act. Since he had not filed any details, the AO denied the claim and treated it the as income. - HELD THAT :- Interest received by the assessee on the surplus funds is to be assessed under the head “income from other sources”, the decision of CIT(A) upheld.
Decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of The Totgar's Co-operative Sale Society Ltd. [2010 (2) TMI 3 - SUPREME COURT] and Madras Cricket Club Versus Income-tax Officer [2009 (11) TMI 586 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] followed.
Decided against the assessee.
-
2013 (4) TMI 783 - ITAT INDORE
Disallowance of 20% cash payment u/s 40A(3) made in respect of its stock-in-trade - Held that:- No purpose will be served in deferring disallowance of such expenditure, which is made in cash during the year under consideration. As per our considered view, giving such direction for deferring the disallowance to subsequent years will frustrate the purpose of Section 40A(3), which is meant for discarding cash payment made during the year in respect of trading goods. Furthermore, there will always be uncertainty as to the year in which the assessee come forward and claim such expenditure in its profit and loss account.
In the instant case before us, even today, the assessee has not come forward to offer such expenditure in the profit and loss account, when more than 6 years have been passed. For the time being, even if it is presumed that the assessee will come forward in the subsequent year, but in that year, keeping in view the period of limitation, no disallowance could be agreed by the assessee in respect of cash payment made for expenditure incurred in the assessment year 2006-07. Furthermore, entries made in books of account is not so relevant for allowing or disallowing a claim of deduction which is necessarily to, be allowed as per provisions of Income-tax Act, 1961. Accordingly, we confirm the action of the CIT(A) for upholding the disallowance so made under Section 40A(3). - Decided against assessee.
-
2013 (4) TMI 782 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... y in receipt of information by the querist. (v). The Nodal Officer on receipt of the information and on processing the same, as indicated above, will immediately write to the querist, indicating to him, the CPIO of the concerned department to whom his application is marked. The return communication of the Nodal Officer shall, set out, the name, address and telephone number of the said CPIO, to facilitate exchange of future communication between the two, if found necessary. (vi). Needless to say, if any application is preferred by a querist, which does not indicate the name of the concerned CPIO, these will be entertained in the first instance by the Nodal Officer and thereafter dealt with, in accordance with the directions, issued hereinabove. 11. The impugned order of the CIC is thus supplanted with the directions issued by this court. 12. Mr. Sachdeva says that the directions will meet the concerns of the respondent herein. 13. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
............
|
