Author: ksalegal

Author Archive


DZ Bank AG – India Representative Office v. DCIT (Mum)(Trib), www.itatonline.org

S.139: Return- A representative office of a foreign enterprise is not a taxable unit-The foreign enterprise is the taxable unit- A return of income filed in the name of the representative office, with the PAN of the enterprise, offering only the income of the representative office & excluding the other Indian income of the enterprise is not proper- DTAA- India -Germany [ S. 9 (1) (i), 115A(5), Art .7, 11(5) ]

Bank of India v. ACIT (Mum)(Trib), www.itatonline.org

S. 90 :Double taxation relief – Book Profit – The fact that profits of foreign branches of a resident are taxed outside India under tax treaties does not imply that the said income is not taxable in India. The entire global income has to be taxed in India- The assesseee is entitled to credit for taxes paid abroad, as admissible under the treaty or the domestic law – Even profits of foreign branches which are taxed under the tax treaties are also liable for MAT. [ S.115JB ]

Amarchand & Mangaldas & Suresh A Shroff & Co. v. ACIT (2021)85 ITR 49 ( SN)/197 DTR 19/ 209 TTJ 1 /187 ITD 750 (Mum)(Trib), www.itatonline.org

S. 90 :Double taxation relief – Foreign Tax Credit – One has to take a judicious call as to whether the view adopted by the source jurisdiction of taxing the income is a reasonable and bonafide view, which may or may not be the same as the legal position in the residence jurisdiction- The view of the treaty partner should be adopted unless it is wholly unreasonable or manifestly erroneous- Entitle for Foreign Tax Credit -. DTAA -India -Japan [ Art 12 , 22 ]

Interactive Avenues Pvt Ltd v DCIT ( 2020) 196 DTR 249// 208 TTJ 945 ( 2021 ) 187 ITD 463 www.itatonline.org Mum) (Trib)

S. 40(a)(ia): Amounts not deductible – Deduction at source – When no deduction is claimed while computing business income , no disallowance can be made for failure to deduct tax at source [ S.30, 38 ]

Suo Motu Contempt Petition In .Re . Prashant Bhushan and Another AIR 2020 SC 4074

Contempt of Courts Act , ( 70 of 1971 )
S. 12 : Punishment for contempt of Court – Advocate – Deliberately using haste / scandalous speech against Supreme Court and entire judicial system – Guilty of criminal contempt of Supreme Court [ Constitution of India , Art. 19 (1) , 129 ]

Procter and Gamble Hygiene And Health Care Ltd. v Dy. CIT (2020) 83 ITR 9 (SN) (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 271G : Penalty-Documents-International transaction-Transfer pricing-Department must mention document and information required to be furnished but not furnished by assessee within specified time-Levy of penalty is held to be not valid.

Rupali Sanjay Bedmutha (Smt.) v. ITO (2020) 83 ITR 30 (SN) (Pune)(Trib.)

S. 271F : Penalty – Return of income-Failure to furnish-Depression and under continuous medical treatment-Reasonable cause-Levy of penalty is held to be not valid. [S. 139(1), 271(1)(b)]

Gopal S. Pandith v. JCIT (2020) 83 ITR 66 (SN) (Bang.)(Trib.) Rajeshwari Pandith (Smt.) v. JCIT (2020) 83 ITR 66 (SN) (Bang.)(Trib.)

S. 271D : Penalty-Takes or accepts any loan or deposit-Wife, son and daughter-Penalty not leviable-Transactions with business associates- Running account-Matter remanded to the Assessing Officer. [S. 269SS, 269T, 271E]

Jitendra Sharma and Bharat Sharma and Shatrughan Sharma v. JCIT (IT) (2020)83 ITR 71 (SN)/( 2021 ) 187 ITD 352/201 DTR 246 /211 TTJ 510 (Indore)(Trib.)

S. 271C : Penalty-Failure to deduct at source-Non-Resident- Deducting the tax at one percent and before conclusion of proceedings depositing correct amount of tax at 20.6 % with applicable interest-Reasonable cause-Levy of penalty is held to be not valid. [S. 194(IA) 195, 273B]

Bank of India v. JCIT (2020) 83 ITR 412 (SN.) (Jaipur)(Trib.)

S. 271C : Penalty-Failure to deduct at source-Assessee in default-Fixed deposit-Form 15G-Reasonable cause-Levy of penalty is not valid. [S. 201(1), 201(IA), Form 15G]