Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


ACIT v. Dhar Construction Co. (2023)101 ITR 49 (SN)(Gau) (Trib)

S. 40(a)(ia): Amounts not deductible-Deduction at source-Salary to partners-Not liable to deduction of tax at source-Deletion of disallowance is affirmed.[S. 15, Explanation 2,192 194D]

Vivek Bhole Architects (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2023) 201 ITD 467 (Mum (Trib.)]

S. 40(a)(ia) : Amounts not deductible-Deduction at source-Additional evidence-NBFC had taken into account interest paid by the assessee while computing the income-Matter remanded to the file of the Assessing Officer. [Form No 26A]

Addl.CIT v. Quippo Oil & Gas Infrastructure Ltd. (Delhi) 201 ITD 47(Delhi)(Trib)

S. 40(a)(ia) : Amounts not deductible-Deduction at source-Contractors/sub-contractors-Obtained PAN of transporters-Mere violation of provisions of s. 194C(7) would not attract disallowance. [S. 194C(6), 194C(7), R. 31A(4)(vi)]

ACIT v Celltick Mobile (India) P. Ltd. (2023) 103 ITR 77 (SN)(Mum)(Trib)

S. 40(a)(i) : Amounts not deductible-Deduction at source-Non-resident-Payment of licence fee to holding company-Assessee submitted Certificate from Chartered Accountant and return and computation of income of payee which Showed that payee had disclosed payment in its return and paid taxes thereon-Held, as per Indo-Israel DTAA Income in question not chargeable to tax in India in hands of Non-Resident-No disallowance can be made-DTAA-India-Israel.[S. 201]

Yamazen Machinery and Tools India (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2023) 200 ITD 205 / 107 ITR 113 (Delhi) (Trib.)

S. 40(a)(i) : Amounts not deductible-Deduction at source-Non-resident-Fes for technical services-Reimbursement of expenses made by assessee to its parent company for salary paid to expatriate employees, was in nature of salary cost and was subjected to TDS under section 192, such reimbursement could not be treated as FTS-DTAA-India-Japan [S. 9(1)(vii),192,195, Art. 12]

DCIT v. H.K Ispat Pvt. Ltd. (2023) 103 ITR 12 (SN)(Ahd)(Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Autorised capital-Depreciation cannot be claimed on expenditure incurred towards increase in authorized share capital.[S. 32]

Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT (2023) 103 ITR 67 (Delhi)(Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Capital or revenue-Expenditure incurred on ice boxes being made for acquiring or bringing into existence an asset for enduring benefit of business was of capital nature.

Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT (2023) 103 ITR 67 (SN)(Delhi)(Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Explanation 2, disallowing CSR expenditure is not retrospective in nature.

Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT (2023) 103 ITR 67 (SN)(Delhi)(Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Non-compete fee being a capital expenditure resulting in enduring benefit cannot be allowed as revenue expenditure.

Dy. CIT v. Asian Star Co. Ltd. (2023) 154 taxmann.com 13 /104 ITR 639 (Mum) (Trib)

S. 37(1): Business expenditure-Income from undisclosed sources-Bogus purchases-Expenditure on commission paid-Allowable as deduction. [S. 133(6), Prohibition of Benami property Transactions Act, 1988, S. 24]