S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Finance lease-Rent paid during lease period is held to be allowable as business expenditure.
NIIT Ltd. v. DCIT (2020) 180 ITD 141 (Delhi)(Trib.)S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Finance lease-Rent paid during lease period is held to be allowable as business expenditure.
NIIT Ltd. v. DCIT (2020) 180 ITD 141 (Delhi)(Trib.)S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Capital or revenue-Expenditure incurred for construction of any structure or extension or improvement of building taken on lease would be treated as capital expenditure-Repair/renovation of leased premises–Held to be allowable as revenue expenditure.
DCIT v. AGC Network Ltd. (2020) 180 ITD 204 (Mum.)(Trib.)S. 37(1) : Business expenditure–Provision for liability on estimated basis –Held to be allowable as deduction–Change in method of accounting – Matter remanded. [S.145, AS-1]
DCIT v. AGC Network Ltd. (2020) 180 ITD 204 (Mum.)(Trib.)S. 36(1)(viii) : Eligible business-Special reserve–General reserve-Balance in profit and loss account, which is not in nature of any other reserve having specific objectives, would not form part of ‘general reserves’ for purpose of proviso to S 36(1)(viii) of the Act
LIC Housing Finance Ltd. (2020) 180 ITD 45 (Mum.)(Trib.)S. 36(1)(vii) : Bad debt–Non furnishing of TDS certificate amounts to amount due–Allowable as bad debt-Cannot be disallowed on ground that it was not within time prescribed under S. 155(14) of the Act.[S. 37(1), 155(14)]
DCIT v. AGC Network Ltd. (2020) 180 ITD 204 (Mum.)(Trib.)S. 36(1)(vii) : Bad debt–Termination of lease agreement–Write off of security deposit–Matter remanded.
DCIT v. AGC Network Ltd. (2020) 180 ITD 204 (Mum.)(Trib.)S. 12AA : Procedure for registration–Trust or institution-Education-Coaching to IBBI aspirant students for examination preparation-Matter remanded for adjudication. [S. 2(15), 11]
IOV Registered Valuers Foundation v. CIT (2020) 180 ITD 1 (Delhi) (Trib.)S. 10(4) : Non-resident–Stayed in India for 283 days for taking up employment–Not entitle to exemption. [S.6, 10(14(iii), Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999, S.2(v)]
Baba Shankar Rajesh v. ACIT (2020) 180 ITD 160 (Chennai)(Trib.)S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty–Concealment–Order of Tribunal set aside the appeal to CIT(A) is held to be valid. [S. 254(1)]
Gangadhar Narsingas Agrawal (HUF) v. ACIT (2020) 188 DTR 119/ 317 CTR 138(Bom.)(HC)S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue–Operation loss in share trading–Verified D-mat accounts, sales, purchases and closing stock–Revision is held to be bad in law. [S.28(i), 143(3)]
PCIT v. Cartier Leaflin (P.) Ltd. (2020) 268 Taxman 222 (Bom.)(HC)