Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Dy. CIT v. Neepa Real Estates P. Ltd. (2024)116 ITR 247// 171 taxmann.com 56 (Mum) (Trib)

S. 43CA : Transfer of assets-other than capital assets-Full value of consideration-stock in trade-Agreement value-Stamp valuation-Difference between sale value and stamp value is below threshold margin of 10 Per Cent-Addition is deleted. [S.50C]

Anushaka Sanjay Shah(Ms) v .ITO (IT) ( Mum)( Trib ) www.itatonline .org

S. 90 :Double taxation relief – Capital gains – Mutual fund Units – Singapore resident – Sale/redemption of mutual fund units would be covered Article 13 of DTAA – Not taxable in India – DTAA – India – Singapore. [ Art. 13(4), 13(5) ]

Maideen Pitchai Rawther Peer Mohammed v. ACIT (2024)116 ITR 71 (SN)(Chennai)(Trib)

S. 41(1) : Profits chargeable to tax-Remission or cessation of trading liability-Goods purchased from brother-Writing off dues as personal help-Liability ceasing to exist on written off by creditor in his books-Addition is justified.

Sadana Electric Store v. Dy. CIT (2024)116 ITR 33 (SN)(Lucknow)(Trib)

S.37(1): Business expenditure-Ad-hoc disallowance-Salary-business promotion expenses, commission,miscellaneous expenses, service and maintenance expenses, telephone,-Repair to building-Books of account not rejected-Disallowance is deleted. [S. 143(3)]

Royal Mahanagar Developers v. Dy. CIT (2024)116 ITR 48 (SN) (Cuttack)(Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Method of accounting-Completed-contract method-Books of account not rejected-Expenditure on completed project for defects and finishing allowable.[S. 145(3)]

Dy. CIT v. Rajendra Gulabchand Shah (2024)116 ITR 21 (SN)(Mum)(Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Transport and hiring charges-Deletion of ad-hoc disallowance of 10 per Cent is affirmed and disallowance of 2% on account of wage and labour charge is affirmed.

Asiatic Colour Chem Ind. Ltd. v. Jt. CIT (2024)116 ITR 7 (SN)(Ahd)(Trib)

S.37(1): Business expenditure-Capital or revenue-Remove defect in title of immoveable property-One time final payment of disputed amount of impact fees to Municipal Corporation-Damages or penalty or interest-Allowable as revenue expenditure. [S. 32, Municipal Corporation Act]

BKS Galaxy Realtors LLP v. Dy. CIT (2024)116 ITR 175 (Mum)(Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Professional fees-Negotiating debt funding-Tax deducted-Payment through banking channels-, Recipients did not file return is not sufficient to disallow payment

Maheswari Mining and Energy P. Ltd. v. ACIT (2024)116 ITR 75 / 162 taxmann.com 574 (. TM) (Hyd)(Trib)

S. 32AD : Investment in new plant or machinery in notified back ward areas in certain States-Additional investment allowance-Notification specifying backward area relates back to 1-4-2015-Entitle to additional investment allowance-The notification is neither taxing nor exempting the tax either in full or in part to any class of assessees but it only specifies the details requisite for implementation of the section-Issuance of notification by the CBDT is only pursuant to the delegated legislation, but not a conditional legislation-Circular No. 19 of 2015, dt. 27-11-2015 (2015) 379 ITR 19 (St), Notification dated 20-7-2016(2016) 386 ITR 6 (St))

Dy. CIT v. Neepa Real Estates P. Ltd. (2024)116 ITR 247 / 171 taxmann.com 56 (Mum) (Trib)

S. 23 : Income from house property-Annual value-Stock in trade-Notional value-Amendment is prospective. [S. 22, 23(5)]-