S. 14A : Disallowance of expenditure-Exempt income-Administrative expenses-Restricted to the extent of exempt income. [R. 8D]
Maharaja Shree Umaid Mills Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2020) 83 ITR 498 (Jaipur)(Trib.)S. 14A : Disallowance of expenditure-Exempt income-Administrative expenses-Restricted to the extent of exempt income. [R. 8D]
Maharaja Shree Umaid Mills Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2020) 83 ITR 498 (Jaipur)(Trib.)S. 14A : Disallowance of expenditure-Exempt income-No exempt income earned during year-No disallowance can be made. [R. 8D]
IBM India Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT (2020) 83 ITR 24 (Bang.)(Trib.)S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes Charitable Purpose-Amended objects-Enabled to exploit infrastructure for commercial purposes-Not entitled to exemption. [S. 2(15)]
Punjab Cricket Association v. ITO (2020) 83 ITR 116/194 DTR 11/ 207 TTJ 476 (Chd.)(Trib.)S. 10AA : Special economic zones-Free Trade Zone-Declaration on Software Technology Parks of India forms sufficient-No Requirement to maintain separate books of account-Entitle to exemption on incremental income arising pursuant to advanced Pricing Agreement (APA).
IBM India Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT (2020) 83 ITR 24 (Bang.)(Trib.)S. 10A : Free trade zone-Turnover-Expenses to be reduced from export turnover as well as from total turnover.
Akamai Technologies India P. Ltd. v. Dy.CIT (2020) 83 ITR 393 (Bang.)(Trib.)S. 5 : Scope of total income Accrual of income-Dispute in project work and reconciliation-Award of Interest-Not enforceable award or decree-Not acquiring any vested right to receive interest-Notional amount not assessable. [S. 4, 145]
MANI Square Ltd. v. ACIT (2020) 83 ITR 241 (Kol.)(Trib.)S. 3 : Previous year-Compensation under settlement agreement-Calendar year as previous year-Date of settlement on 1-1-1984-Receipt was taxable in the assessment year 1985-86 and assessment year 1984-85. [S. 3(1)]
IAC (Assessment) v. Hydrocarbons India Ltd. (2020) 83 ITR 1 (Delhi)(Trib.)S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Failure to specify the charge, which limb penalty proceedings initiated-Penalty quashed.
Raj Kumar v. ITO (2020) 82 ITR 509 (Delhi)(Trib.)S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Cash deposits-Detailed reply along with documentary evidence filed before Assessing Officer to explain source of Cash deposits-Order neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of revenue.
Sameer Gupta v. PCIT (2020)82 ITR 180 (Indore)(Trib.)S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Charitable trust-Assessment Order Cryptic and without any discussion-Revision is held to be justified. [S. 11, 12A]
Mymul Raitha Kalyana Trust v. CIT(E) (2020) 82 ITR 434 (Bang.) (Trib.)