These judgements are uploaded by our esteemed readers. If you have a judgement on an important topic that you would like to share with others, please use this form to upload it
Percival Joseph Pereira v. ITO (ITAT Mumbai)
Mumbai Tribunal : S. 45 : Capital gains Interim order-Year of taxability of capital gains on compensation-Interest on compensation-Income from other sources - Delay of 404 days-Delay is condoned-The compensation and interest received by in pursuance of an interim order of the Bombay High Court cannot be taxed in the year of receipt-Addition is deleted -Compensation and interest… Read More ...
Geecee Ventures Limited vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (ITAT Mumbai)
ITAT (Mumbai): Sec. 80-IA: Even if income under the head Business/ profession is a loss, deduction under section 80-IA(4) is allowable from other heads of income if the Gross Total Income is a positive figure. Sec. 14A: Only investments yielding exempt income during the relevant previous year shall be taken into consideration for the purpose of computing… Read More ...
Shital Fibers Limited versus Commissioner of Income Tax (Supreme Court)
Supreme Court: The object of section 80- IA(9) is not to curtail the deductions computable under various provisions under Chapter VI-A. Section 80-IA(9) affects allowability of deduction and not computation of deduction (i) Section 80-IA(9) does not affect the computability of deduction under various provisions under heading C of Chapter VI-A, but it affects the allowability of… Read More ...
NOBLE RESOURCES AND TRADING INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS UNION OF INDIA (Supreme Court)
Supreme Court: What is "manufacture"? Whether the process carried out by using soyabean as raw material and ending in the product crude degummed soyabean oil is manufacturing? (1) To constitute manufacture, the following are the essential features: i. There must be a process or series of process. ii. The original commodity or raw material undergoes a transformation… Read More ...
JCIT v. Aries Agro Ltd (ITAT Mumbai)
Mumbai Tribunal : S. 68 : Cash credits-Cash deposit-Demoetizaation-Produced names, address, PAN etc-Parties have responded to the notices u/s 133(6)-Sales are accepted by VAT department-No defects in the books of account-Order of CIT(A) deleting the addition is affirmed. [S. 133(6), 143(3)] The assesseee has deposited cash sales in the bank account. The Assessing officer assessed the said deposit… Read More ...
Exquisite Jewellery vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai)
ITAT Mumbai: Interest under section 234B of the Act, even though mandatory, cannot be levied if the addition to income is made on account of a retrospective amendment. In this case, the addition was made during assessment on account of excess credit period granted to an associated enterprise. The provisions which regard excess credit period granted to… Read More ...
DCIT vs Dinesh Lakhmichand Rohira [ITA No 5463/Mum/2024] (ITAT Mumbai)
Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT: Statement / details / information filed by third party or searched party before Income Tax Settlement Commission cannot be reason to make the addition in the case of an assessee sans any corroborative evidence. Read More ...
Dy. CIT v. Heart Foundation of India (ITAT Mumbai)
Mumbai Tribunal : S. 254(2) : Appellate Tribunal-Rectification of mistake apparent from the record-Territorial jurisdiction-Rectification application filed by the Revenue to quash the order of Mumbai Tribunal on the ground that the Mumbai Tribunal had no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal and the appeal should have been filed before the ITAT at Pune is dismissed. [S. 12A, 127]… Read More ...
Kalpana Dilip Mehta as Legal Heir of Dilip Dalpatlal Mehta v. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai)
Mumbai Tribunal : S. 148 : Reassessment-Unexplained money-Undisclosed foreign bank account-Notice u/s 143(2) was not issued within specified time limit-Reassessment was completed beyond period of limitation, exchange of information came into operation from the first day of April, 2011 whereas the relevant financial year corresponding to the assessment year 2007-08 is from 01.04.2006 to 31.03.2007-Reassessment order is quashed… Read More ...
PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 VERSUS V-CON INTEGRATED SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD (SUPREME COURT)
Supreme Court: S. 263 Revision: There is a distinction between the failure or absence of investigation and a wrong decision/ conclusion. If the AO has reached a wrong decision/conclusion, the CIT cannot remand the case to the AO but must correct it with a decision on merits. A remand is justified only if the AO has made… Read More ...