Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


DCIT v. Macrotech Developer Ltd. (2022) 192 ITD 438 (Mum.) (Trib.)

S. 36(1)(iii) : Interest on borrowed capital-Own funds are more than interest free investment-No disallowance can be made.

Plintron Mobility Solutions (P.) Ltd. v. ITO (2022) 192 ITD 556 (Chennai)(Trib.)

S. 32 : Depreciation-Computer software-Integrated part of computer system-Eligible depreciation at rate of 60 percent.

Motor Machinery Tools v. ACIT (2022) 192 ITD 42 (SMC) (Kol.) (Trib.)

S. 28(iv) : Business income-Value of any benefit or perquisites-Converted in to money or not-Dealer-Redistributor-Incentive from UI for purchase of Van-Not in the nature of perquisite-Reduced from the cost of acquisition for claiming depreciation. [S. 32, 43(1)]

Govind Ganpatlal Thakkar. v. ACIT (2022) 192 ITD 647 (Ahd.) (Trib.)

S. 28(i) : Business income-Gross income as per books of account and gross revenue in from No 26AS-Reconciliation statement was filed-Matter remanded to the Assessing Officer-Capital gains-Valuation report-Assessing Officer cannot reject the valuation report of the valuer without referring to valuation Officer-Matter remanded. [S. 45, 50C(2), 194H, Form No 26AS]

Ashok Kirtanlal Shah v. ACIT (2022) 192 ITD 193 (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 14A : Disallowance of expenditure-Exempt income-Disallowing the expenditure without recording satisfaction is held to be not justified. [R. 8D]

Shivnarayan Nemani Shares & Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. v. DCIT (2022) 192 ITD 50 (Mum.)(Trib.)

S.14A : Disallowance of expenditure-Exempt income-Only the value of investments which yielded exempt income during year. [R. 8D (iii]

Krishna Mohan Choursiya. v. ITO (2022) 192 ITD 214 (Indore) (Trib.)

S. 10(37) : Capital gains-Agricultural land-With in specified urban limits-Rural agricultural land-Not converted in to non-agricultural-Capital gain is exempt-Income from transfer of agricultural land-Compulsory acquisition-Compensation received on compulsory acquisition of rural agricultural land is not chargeable to tax and compensation received on compulsory acquisition of urban agricultural land is exempt from tax Exempt from tax. [S. 2(14)(iii), 45]

Inter Continental Hotels Group (Asia Pacific) (Pte.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2022) 192 ITD 497 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 9(1)(vii) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Fees for technical services-Support service agreement-No transfer of technology nor transfer of any skill or know-how, management-Support services in relation to operational, accounting, training and recruitment etc. would not be regarded as services which was ‘make available’ and accordingly, not taxable as ‘fees for technical services’ under article 12(4) of India-Singapore tax treaty. [Art. 12(4)]

Hitachi Metglas (India) (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2022) 192 ITD 357/ 217 TTJ 743/ 214 DTR 15 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 9(1)(vii) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Fees for technical services-Service provider-Entire process resulting in provisioning of service was fully automated process with no human intervention, charges paid for provision of such services could not be classified as FTS-Not liable to deduct tax at source-OECD Model, Art. 12. [S. 195]

Infosys BPO Ltd. v. DCIT (2022) 192 ITD 94/ / 217 TTJ 478/ 214 DTR 89 (Bang.)(Trib.)

S. 9(1)(vii) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Fees for technical services-Legal fees-Services rendered by a non-resident law firm-Not taxable in India-Not liable to deduct tax at source-The firm had given a certificate stating that there was no fixed place of business/PE in India, impugned fee paid by assessee did not trigger taxability under article 15 of India-DTAA-India-Poland [S. 195, Art. 4, 13(4), 15]