Advanced Search Options
Income Tax - Case Laws
Showing 121 to 140 of 585 Records
-
2013 (9) TMI 1075 - ITAT MUMBAI
Reopening of assessment - Held that:- Considering the absence of "tangible material", we find that the CIT (A) order is required to be reversed. As such, AO reopened the assessment relying only on the papers available on records. Therefore, we agree with the arguments of the Ld AR for the assessee. On merits also, it is the case of the assessee that there is sufficient interest free funds to cover the interest free advances given by the assessee and therefore, the presumption would be that such advances were given from interest free funds and not from the interest bearing funds as held by the Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd [2009 (1) TMI 4 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT ] 313 ITR 340. Without going into the merit, in our view, the assessee should succeed on the legal issue itself
-
2013 (9) TMI 1073 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Review of our judgment in Commissioner of Income Tax Versus M/s Vector Shipping Services (P) Ltd. [2013 (7) TMI 622 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] - Held that:- We do not find that the grounds of review are good and sufficient. The department has not pointed out any error apparent on the face of record. The admission of two other appeals on the same question or stay of judgment of Vishakhapatnam Bench of the Tribunal is not a ground on which the judgment of the Court may be reviewed.
-
2013 (9) TMI 1072 - ITAT BANGALORE
TDS u/s 194C - reimbursement of expenses by C&F Agents - Held that:- There is no need to deduct TDS on reimbursement of expenses to C& F Agents which are separately billed and accordingly uphold the order of the learned CIT(Appeals).
Disallowance due to shortage - Held that:- In the absence of any basis for the Assessing Officer to adopt shortages at 2% in the absence of any industry average, we find that, the learned CIT (Appeals) examined the shortages claimed by the assessee in the period 2004-05 to 2006-07. It is seen that the shortage of Assessment Year 2004-05 was 9.75% and that of Asst. Year 2006-07 was 4.68% which fluctuated and was in excess of the 3.64% shortage of the current year. In this factual view of the matter, we agree with the learned CIT (Appeals) that the shortages at 3.64% in the current year is less than that of both the earlier and subsequent year and is therefore reasonable. In view of the above, we find no infirmity in the order of the learned CIT (Appeals) and uphold the same.
Seed Development Expenses disallowed - Held that:- It is an uncontroverted fact that the assessee does not carry out any research and development activity. The facts on record establish that the expenses incurred by the assessee were towards purchase of parent seeds. If a part of the amount paid by the assessee have been utilised by Metahelix for development of seeds, the expenses can be capital in nature for Metahelix but not for the assessee. Merely because the expenses paid by the assessee to Metahelix is towards defraying the expenses of development of parent seeds, it does not change the nature of the expenditure by the assessee which is for procurement of parent seeds. As far as the assessee is concerned, the entire expenditure is incurred towards purchase of parent seeds and therefore it is entirely revenue in nature. There is no enduring benefit to the assessee due to the purchase of parent seeds as they lose their existence and form once they are converted into hybrid seeds. In this view of the matter, we are of the considered opinion that the entire expenditure is revenue in nature and are therefore entirely allowable expenditure.
-
2013 (9) TMI 1071 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
Addition u/s 14A - interest attributable to investment in shares - interest on term loans, bank charges and guarantee fees - Held that:- The investments were in the form of shares of subsidiary companies as part of the financial restructuring plan approved by the Government of Gujarat which was integral to the demerger - decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court pronounced in the case of Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. Muimbai vs. Dy.CIT [2010 (8) TMI 77 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] - AO is duty bound to determine the expenditure which has been incurred in relation to income which does not form part of the total income - AO should provide a reasonable opportunity to the assessee of producing its accounts - Remanded back for statistical purpose.
Addition made u/s. 43B - contribution to PF - Held that:- AO has not properly examined the facts of the case - date of payments as declared by the assessee - assessee produced all details before CIT(A) - held that there was no payment beyond the due date but deposited in advance - Decided in favor of Assessee
Income over expenditure materialized during the year but not offered for taxation in case of demerger - whether the expenses and income could be considered as income and expenses of the successor - Held that:- the income arising after the demerger is the responsibility of the “resulting company” to be taxed as per law - assessee to place the relevant evidence before the AO through which it can be demonstrated that amount had already been offered to tax - Remanded back for statistical purpose.
Addition of ₹ 6,60,52,000/- being total legal and preparation fees treated as capital expenditure - Held that:- None payments can be categorized as capital in nature since no enduring benefit was derived and nor any asset was brought into existence - expenditure was connected with the business activity of the assessee - Decided in favor of Assessee
Exclusion under provisions for gratuity - which is an unascertained liability for computation of book profit u/s.115JB - Held that:- provision for gratuity was made on acturial valuation; hence, it was not an unascertained liability - Decided in favor of Assessee
Adjustment of book profit u/s. 115J - Held that:- AO to do afresh adjudication - Remanded back for statistical purpose.
-
2013 (9) TMI 1070 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Monetary limit - Held that:- ITAT has dismissed the appeals solely on the ground of low tax effect and on the ground that the amount of tax involved is below monetary limits prescribed by the Board. While dismissing the appeals, learned ITAT has not entered into the merits of the case at all and has dismissed the appeals solely on the aforesaid ground. However, learned ITAT has not properly appreciated the fact that appropriate computation of law should be necessary and may have relevance, if any, subsequent years, the assessee declares profits. It is the case on behalf of the revenue that the aforesaid would have been considered, the amount involved in each of the appeals is in excess of limit laid down in the circular prevailing at the relevant time.
-
2013 (9) TMI 1069 - ITAT DELHI
Transfer pricing adjustment - comparability - Held that:- Those companies ( like Infosys and others) are full fledged risk bearing companies and are functionally dissimilar as a comparable to assessee who is a captive software service provider.
Addition u/s 14A - Held that:- It has not been disputed that no borrowed funds were utilized for investment in mutual funds. Consequently, the average cost of investment almost becomes nil. However, various courts have held that the investment and consequent earnings have back up of the administrative infrastructure. Keeping in view the same, we are inclined to restrict the estimated disallowance u/s 14A in this behalf @ 10% of the dividend i.e. 57,580/-. This ground is partly allowed.
-
2013 (9) TMI 1068 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
Levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Held that:- We find no force in the submissions in the absence of any enquiry during penalty proceedings, penalty proceedings could not have been levied. As stated earlier while discussing legal position, the burden was on the assessee to give proper explanation which has not been found to be bonafide in the absence of PAN and other details. Therefore, clearly the assessee has concealed the particulars of income and the assessee has miserably failed to prove the transaction relating to the deposits received from Shri Pritam Singh. In our opinion, this is a fit case for levy of penalty and in our opinion, the ld. CIT(A) has correctly confirmed the levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act.
-
2013 (9) TMI 1066 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
Addition on account of valuation of closing stock - rejection of books of account - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that:- On the basis of the doctrine of consistency in relation to method of valuation of inventory as also the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in assessee's own case, she recorded findings in favour of the assessee. Having regard to the fact-situation of the case, decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court, relied upon by the ld. CIT(A), and the relevance of consistency principle in the matter, we do not find any infirmity, in the findings of the CIT(A), and hence, the same are upheld.
Addition to credit n capital account - Held that:- The assessee has filed the confirmation of M/s Good Faith Cement Pvt. Ltd. at page 12 of the Paper Book alongwith the copy of the cheque issued by the said authority and the bank statement in which such cheque had been deposited. The explanation of the assessee was not accepted as the letter issued by the Assessing Officer under section 133 (6) of the Act was received back undelivered. In the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and following the principle of natural justice, we deem it fit to restore this issue back to the file of Assessing Officer to redecide the same denovo after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee has to discharge the onus cast upon him and furnish the requisite information before the Assessing Officer.
-
2013 (9) TMI 1065 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
Estimation of sale price - trading addition - Held that:- Without pinpointing out the defect how the sale price was not correct, the Assessing Officer could not have estimated the sale price on the basis of rates of closing stock or some other notional basis. However, at the same time there is no justification for selling particularly the rice DB at much lower price than the closing stock price or opening stock price. Therefore, in order to prevent the leakage of Revenue, we are of the opinion that the estimated addition of ₹ 2 lakhs is required to be made and accordingly we set aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) and direct the Assessing Officer to make the addition of ₹ 2 lakhs on trading account.
-
2013 (9) TMI 1064 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Allowability of expenditure - revenue v/s capital - Held that:- The appellant has expended money not merely to preserve and maintain an existing building but to obtain a fresh advantage by creating cabins, rooms etc. by the use of cement, iron, saria etc. as opposed to mere maintenance and preservation of the premises. The Assessing Officer has allowed expenses on account of renovation of toilets, painting etc. as a revenue expenditure but where the expense involves capital expenditure, it has not been allowed under Section 30(a)(i) of the Act. We find no error in the course adopted by the revenue. In the absence of any error of law or of fact in the impugned orders, we find no reason to hold that the assessee is entitled to deduction under Section 30(a)(i) of the Act. The questions of law are, therefore, answered against the appellant.
-
2013 (9) TMI 1062 - ITAT PUNE
Disallowance u/s.14A applying Rule 8D - Held that:- There cannot be profit on the transfer of the mutual funds but as we have held that there is no specific finding by the AO nor by the CIT(A) that infact the assessee has used the interest bearing funds for investment, on this factual aspect, we hold that there is no justification to make the disallowance. We accordingly delete the addition made by the AO u/s.14A r.w. Rule 8D as the mandate of section 14A(1) is not fulfilled. - Decided in favour of assessee
-
2013 (9) TMI 1060 - ITAT MUMBAI
CIT order u/s 250 - not allowing the loss incurred to be set-off against other income by AO - Held that:- The investigation initiated by the AO is not taken to the logical end. In our view, the AO prematurely shifted the onus to the assessee. At the same time, the assessee also relied on the human probabilities without doing his part by obtaining the information about the correctness of the address of Aadya Trading and Investment Pvt. Ltd if any.
Regarding Client Code Modification ('CCM') related allegations of the AO, we find that the NSE has a definite policy in this regard. We find the AO made enquiries with the NSE, who replied to the AO vide the letter dated 3.11.2010. The same is extracted at para 4.1 of the Assessment order. On perusal of the same, we find that the language used in the letter varies with the one used and narrated in the actual policy adopted by the NSE on this CCM. The fact that loss is transferred to Client No 31 is to the benefit of the assessee, there is some amount of responsibility on his part to do in the interest of the justice. Assessee being the beneficiary of the impugned loss and the claimer of the deduction by way of set off against the other income, or the Broker, who is party to such generation of loss, needs to demonstrate on what basis the client Codes No.SJ17 and M032 are similar to that of the assessee. Are the names are similar? Are these three clients are part of the assessee's family? How the SJ17 or MO32 are akin to MO 31? These are the logical questions which are required to be answered by the claimer of the deduction or generator of the impugned losses.
Therefore, basis facts relating to peculiar issues enlisted above, are essentially required for meaningful adjudication of the ground raised before us. Thus, in the interest of the justice, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) and restore the issue to the files of the AO for fresh adjudication after completing the enquiries initiated in the regular assessment proceedings. AO shall grant reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Accordingly, the solitary ground raised by the assessee is set aside.
-
2013 (9) TMI 1059 - ITAT MUMBAI
TDS u/s 194I - Payment for acquiring leasehold land is a capital expenditure. Considering the entire facts in totality in the light of the judicial decisions vis-à-vis provisions of Sec. 194-1, definition of rent as provided under the said provision, we do not find any reason to tamper or interfere with the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) which we confirm.
-
2013 (9) TMI 1058 - ITAT PUNE
Claim of the assessee on account of amortization of premium on investments allowed See ACIT Vs. Pune Peoples Cooperative Bank Ltd. [2013 (8) TMI 922 - ITAT PUNE ]
-
2013 (9) TMI 1057 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Addition made to the book profit on account of alleged arrear depreciation for the purpose of computing the profit u/s 115J - Held that:- Learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that they have no objection, in case, the assessing officer carries out the necessary verification and examines whether additional depreciation of ₹ 126.18 lacs was on account of change in method of calculation of depreciation or had arisen on account of the fact that it pertained to earlier period but has been claimed in this year for some other reason other than the change in method of calculation of depreciation. Statement made by the counsel for the respondent is taken on record. We clarify that in case this difference has arisen on account of change of method of calculation of depreciation, the assessing officer will not touch and go into any other aspect. This answers question No.(i) which has to be answered against the revenue and in favour of the respondent assessee
Addition being expenditure incurred on rural development programmes treating them as advertisement and publicity expenses - Held that:- In the absence of full facts and failure of the appellant to place relevant orders on record, we cannot answer the question and the same is left unanswered for want of details and proper prosecution.
Debenture issue expenses on issue of convertible debentures - Held that:- Third question referred to above is covered by the judgment of the Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Havells India Limited; [2012 (5) TMI 449 - DELHI HIGH COURT ]
-
2013 (9) TMI 1056 - ITAT MUMBAI
Capital gain computation u/s 50 r.w.s 50C - Held that:- For the purpose of computation of capital gain, the flat has to be treated as short term capital gain u/s 50 of the IT Act, but for the purpose of applicability of tax rate it has to be treated as long term capital gain if held for more than three years. We accordingly direct the AO to compute the capital gain from the sale of flat and apply the appropriate tax rate after necessary verification in the light of observations made in this order.
Addition of bad debts - Held that:- Deposits/advances given in connection with business are very old and have not been recovered till now. The assessee had, therefore, written off the amounts in the books of accounts. It is not cost effective to enforce recovery by filing suits. In our view, considering the smallness of amounts and the facts and circumstances of the case, claim has to be allowed as business loss.
-
2013 (9) TMI 1054 - ITAT AMRITSAR
Capital gain tax u/s 45 for the total consideration received and receivable by being a Member of the Society in view of JDA - Held that:- The Society was formed by various Members for the purpose of purchase of land and to develop the same and they allotted the plots to the Members. The Society purchased 21.2 acres of land and ultimately plots in the sizes of 500sqyd and 1000sqyd were allotted to various Members. When the proposal for development of property came it was resolved in the General Body Meeting of the Society that the Members would surrender their rights in favour of the Society so that the Society can enter into the JDA. Thus it is clear that the Society has entered into JDA on behalf of the Members. It is the members who are owning the plots and the Society was only a facilitator. It becomes clear from the JDA that payment for consideration was to be made to an individual plot holder and in fact consideration was mentioned in terms of per Member. Each Member holding 500sqyd plot was to receive a sum of ₹ 82,50,000/- and one fully furnished flat measuring 2250 sqft and the Members holding 1000sqyd plot were to receive monetary consideration of ₹ 1.65 crores plus two flats measuring 2250 sqft. In fact the payment of cheques is made by Hash by issuing cheques in the name of individual Member and not the Society. This fact stands admitted because assessee has filed a return declaring capital gain against part money received against his plot. Thus it becomes clear that it is the individual member who are liable to tax in respect of transfer to plots and the Society being only a facilitator or Post office.
-
2013 (9) TMI 1052 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Held that:- The addition in the hands of the assessee was made on two accounts i.e. (i) because of non declaration of receipts by the assessee and; (ii) estimation of profits in the hands of the assessee. As far as the issue of estimation of profits in the hands of the assessee is concerned, we are of the view that there is no merit in the levy of penalty under section 271 (1) (c) of the Act as it is the case of two views and because of the divergence of view, estimation of profits in the hands of the assessee. Accordingly, we uphold the order of the CIT(Appeals) in this regard and confirm the deletion of penalty on estimation of profits in the hands of the assessee. The grounds of appeal raised by the revenue are dismissed.
Addition on which penalty under section 271 (1) (c) was levied, was under declaration of the receipts by the assessee. The assessee had declared contract receipts from the civil work undertaken by the assessee. However, receipts totaling ₹ 21,54,387/- were not declared and some part was declared in the security account by the assessee but were not declared as part of the receipts from PWD, Sirhind. When information was called from the PWD, Sirhind, the Assessing Officer found the assessee to have suppressed its contract receipts on which tax was also deducted at source by the said concern. The case of the assessee, however was that it had not received the said TDS certificates from the said department and, hence the confusion and under-declaration of the receipts by the assessee. We find no merit in the stand of the assessee in this regard and it is a fit case of levy of penalty for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income
-
2013 (9) TMI 1051 - ITAT CHENNAI
Deemed dividend addition u/s 2(22) - Held that:- Admittedly the assessee company was not holding any shares in the lender company at all. Therefore, in our opinionthe loan received by the assessee-company from M/s Pugazh Chemical Plant & Equipments (P) Ltd. could not be considered as deemed dividend in the hands of the assesseecompany deposit it being not a trading advance. - Decided in favour of assessee
-
2013 (9) TMI 1048 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
After filing of the writ petition the Order-in-Original has been passed against which the petitioner proposes to file an appeal.
This writ petition as such has become infructuous.
............
|