S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal-Duties-Directions-ITAT should take appropriate steps and expedite hearing in old appeals.
Nokia Solutions and Networks Italia Spa v. DDIT (Delhi)(HC), www.itatonline.orgS. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal-Duties-Directions-ITAT should take appropriate steps and expedite hearing in old appeals.
Nokia Solutions and Networks Italia Spa v. DDIT (Delhi)(HC), www.itatonline.orgS. 147 : Reassessment –Non disclosure of receipt- Capital gains- Sale of shares- Long term – STT paid -The attempt of further verification would amount to rowing inquiry- Reassessment is bad in law. [S 2(29A, 10(38) ,115JB, .143(1), 148]
Swastic Safe Deposit and Investment Ltd. v. ACIT ( 2019)265 Taxman 164/(2020) 312 CTR 389/ 185 DTR 156 (Bom.)(HC), www.itatonline.orgEdditorial : SLP of revenue is dismissed ACIT v. Swastik Safe Deposit and Investments Ltd ( 2020) 118 taxmann.com 94/ 273 Taxman 89 (SC)S. 143(2) : Assessment-Notice-If a notice is issued but is returned unserved by the postal authorities and thereafter no effort is made to serve another notice before the deadline, it shall be deemed to be a case of “non-service” and the assessment order will have to be quashed. [ [S.292BB, R.127, General Clauses Act, 1897, S. 27 ]
Anil kisanlal Marda v. ITO ( 2019) 177 ITD 749 /182 DTR 153 / 201 TTJ 100(Pune)(Trib.), www.itatonline.orgS. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-cannot determine The ALP at nil on an ad-hoc basis-If an authority like the RBI or Commerce Ministry has approved the rate of royalty, it carries persuasive value that the rate is at ALP.
ACIT v. Netafim Irrigation India Pvt. Ltd. ( 2020) 185 DTR 30(Mum.)(Trib.), www.itatonline.orgS. 68 : Cash credits-Bogus capital gains from penny stocks-Mere allegation is not sufficient–No action from SBI–Capital gains cannot be assessed as cash credits. [S. 45]
Deepak Nagar v. DCIT (Delhi)(Trib.), www.itatonline.orgS. 68 : Cash credits–Non–Resident–I Not an ordinary resident -if the assessee is non–resident amount found deposited in a foreign bank is not taxable in India either u/s 68 or u/s 69 of the Act. Period of 182 days to be considered for calculating residential status of a person migrated to Foreign Country [S. 6(6), 69]
PCIT v. Binod Kumar Singh ( 2019) 178 DTR 49 / 264 Taxman 335/ 310 CTR 243 /( 2020) 423 ITR 175 (Bom.)(HC), www.itatonline.orgS. 56 : Income from other sources–Valuation-start-up-Assessee has the option under Rule 11UA(2) to determine the FMV by either the ‘DCF Method’ or the ‘NAV Method’-The AO has no jurisdiction to tinker with the valuation and to substitute his own value or to reject the valuation. [S. 56(2)(viib),,R.11UA(2)]
Cinestaan Entertainment P. Ltd. v. ITO ( 2019) 200 TTJ 459/ 180 DTR 65/ 177 ITD 809 (Delhi)(Trib.), www.itatonline.orgEditorial , Affirmed in PCIT v. Cinestaan Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. (2021) 433 ITR 82/ 199 DTR 345/ 320 CTR 381 (Delhi) (HC)S. 43(5) : Speculative transaction-Non–banking financial company- Trading in shares and securities-Loss incurred as a result of trading in shares–cannot be set off against the business of futures and options as it did not constitute profits and gains of a speculative business. Statement by assessee before Assessing Officer that share trading was its sole business during the year – Bond by admission – Interpretation- Intention of legislature to be seen . [S. 73, 143 (3( ]
Snowtex Investment Ltd. v. PCIT (SC)(2019) 414 ITR 227/ 265 Taxman 3 / 308 CTR 665/ 178 DTR 89 (SC), www.itatonline.org.Editorial: Judgment from , PCIT v. Snowtex Investment Ltd ( 2017) 87 taxmann.com 356 ( Cal) (HC)S. 40A(9) : Expenses or payments not deductible-Contributions to unapproved and unrecognized funds–Held to be allowable if they are genuine in nature. [ S.36(1) (iv), 36(1)(iva) 36(1)(v) ]
PCIT v. State Bank of India ( 2019) 181 DTR 275 / ( 2020) 420 ITR 376/314 CTR 542 (Bom.)(HC), www.itatonline.orgS. 271BA : Penalty-Failure to furnish reports-International transaction-Transfer pricing–Report was filed in the course of assessment proceedings–Failed to up load the form on e. portal – Ignorance or oversight–Bona fide mistake -Levy of penalty is held to be not justified. [S. 92CA(3), 92E, 273B]
Shree Ram Dass Rice & General Mills v. DCIT (2019) 176 ITD 748 (Chd.)(Trib.)