Search Results For: N.R.S. Ganesan (JM)


Dr. Muthian Sivathanu vs. ACIT (ITAT Chennai)

COURT:
CORAM: ,
SECTION(S): , , ,
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS: , ,
COUNSEL:
DATE: October 24, 2018 (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: November 21, 2018 (Date of publication)
AY: 2011-12
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:
S. 17(2)(vi) Perquisite: Gains arising to an employee from sale of shares allotted under ESOP (Employees Stock Option Plan) by foreign parent company cannot be assessed as "salaries". It is assessable as "capital gains". Fact that employer has shown the gains as "perquisite" in Form 16 is irrelevant

The assessee had already acquired the asset viz., “stock” from the employee’s stock options scheme when he was serving abroad in the parent company and during that assessment year, the assessee was non-resident. Therefore during the beginning of the relevant assessment year, the stock viz., the asset was already vested on the assessee. Any gain on sale arising out of such asset during the relevant assessment year when he is a resident but NOR has to be necessarily treated as capital gain in the hands of the assessee as per the provisions of the act

Dishnet Wireless Limited vs. DCIT (ITAT Chennai)

COURT:
CORAM: ,
SECTION(S): , ,
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL: ,
DATE: July 20, 2015 (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: July 28, 2015 (Date of publication)
AY: 2007-08 to 2011-12
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:
S. 194C/ 194J: No obligation to deduct TDS at stage of making provision for expenditure if payee cannot be identified. No obligation to deduct TDS if services (roaming charges) are rendered without human intervention and are not "technical services"

The assessee has to issue Form 16A prescribed under Rule 31(1)(b) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 for the tax deducted at source. The assessee has to necessarily give the details of name and address of deductee, the PAN of deductee and amount or credited. In this case, the assessee could not identify the name and address of deductee and and his PAN. The assessee also may not be in a position to quantify the amount required for incurring the expenditure for dismantling and restoration of site to its original position. In those circumstances, the provision which requires deduction of tax at source fails. Hence, the assessee cannot be faulted for non-deduction of tax at source while making a provision

G. Indhirani vs. DCIT (ITAT Chennai)

COURT:
CORAM: ,
SECTION(S): ,
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS: ,
COUNSEL:
DATE: July 10, 2015 (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: July 16, 2015 (Date of publication)
AY: 2013-14
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:
S. 234E: Prior to the amendment to s. 200A w.e.f. 01.06.2015, the fee for default in filing TDS statements cannot be recovered from the assessee-deductor while processing the s. 200A statement. However, the AO is entitled to pass a separate order u/s 234E to levy the fee within the limitation period

The Assessing Officer has exceeded his jurisdiction in levying fee under Section 234E while processing the statement and make adjustment under Section 200A of the Act. Therefore, the impugned intimation of the lower authorities levying fee under Section 234E of the Act cannot be sustained in law. However, it is made clear that it is open to the Assessing Officer to pass a separate order under Section 234E of the Act levying fee provided the limitation for such a levy has not expired

The Ramanthali Service Co-operative Bank Ltd vs. ITO (ITAT Cochin)

COURT:
CORAM: ,
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: November 21, 2014 (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: December 2, 2014 (Date of publication)
AY: 2009-10
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:
S. 40(a)(ia) second proviso is not retrospective & so payment of TDS before due date of ROI does not prevent disallowance. Law laid down in Vector Shipping cannot be followed

(i) The next question arises for consideration is whether the second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) as incorporated by Finance Act, 2012 is retrospective in operation or prospective in operation. We are conscious that some of the benches of this Tribunal

Mathewsons Exports & Imports vs. ACIT (ITAT Cochin)

COURT:
CORAM: ,
SECTION(S): , ,
GENRE: ,
CATCH WORDS: ,
COUNSEL:
DATE: October 21, 2014 (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: October 24, 2014 (Date of publication)
AY: 2006-07
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:
charter hire payment is not assessable as royalty, there is no obligation to deduct TDS and no disallowance u/s 40(a)(i) can be made

It is very clear that the payments made by the assessee company were in the nature of simple payments for chartering ships on hire for doing the business outside India. Therefore, the payments do not satisfy the test laid down

Padinjarekara Agencies Pvt. Ltd vs. ACIT (ITAT Cochin)

COURT:
CORAM: ,
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS: ,
COUNSEL:
DATE: October 17, 2014 (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: October 21, 2014 (Date of publication)
AY: 2005-06
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:
S. 115JB: AO entitled to tinker with P&L A/c if assessee's claim not permitted by accounting principles

The question that had arisen was whether the Assessing officer was entitled to disturb the net profit shown by the assessee in the profit and loss account prepared as per the Companies Act, 1956.in order to enable anybody to understand

Geojit Investment Services Ltd vs. ACIT (ITAT Cochin)

COURT:
CORAM: ,
SECTION(S): ,
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: August 28, 2014 (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: October 15, 2014 (Date of publication)
AY: 2008-09
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:
S. 14A: In applying Rule 8D(2)(ii) interest expenses directly attributable to tax exempt income as also directly attributable to taxable income, are required to be excluded from computation of common interest expenses to be allocated.

(1) S. 14 A (2) requires the AO to determine the amount of expenditure incurred in relation to such income which does not form part of the total income under this Act in accordance with such method as may be

M. Ahammedkutty vs. ITO (ITAT Cochin)

COURT:
CORAM: ,
SECTION(S): , ,
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS: , , ,
COUNSEL:
DATE: September 19, 2014 (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: October 5, 2014 (Date of publication)
AY: 2007-08
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:
U/s 45(4), capital gains on transfer of capital assets on dissolution of firm has to be worked out on the basis of the fair market value of the capital asset on the date of transfer

(i) Dissolution and retirement are two different concepts. In the case of retirement, the retiring partner goes out of the firm but the remaining partners continue to carry on the business of the partnership as a firm. In the case

M/s Orchid Marine vs. ITO (ITAT Cochin)

COURT:
CORAM: ,
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: September 24, 2014 (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: October 5, 2014 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:
S. 40(a)(ia): Verdict in Merilyn Shipping & Vector Shipping (All HC) cannot be followed in view of Crescent Export Syndicate (Cal HC), Sikandarkhan N Tunvar (Guj HC) & Rishti Stock & Shares

(i) We have also carefully gone through the judgment of the Allahabad High Court in CIT vs M/s Vector Shipping Services (P) Ltd (supra), copy of which is filed by the assessee. The Allahabad High Court, after reproducing the relevant

Top