IN THE ITAT BANGALORE BENCH 'C' A.
|
|
- Lenard Howard
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 IT/ILT : Where on date of purchase of house property from non-resident vendor, assessee was aware of fact that capital gain was not taxable in vendor's hands due to availability of deduction under section 54, he was not required to deduct tax at source while making payment of sales consideration [2015] 53 taxmann.com 102 (Bangalore - Trib.) IN THE ITAT BANGALORE BENCH 'C' A. Mohiuddin v. Additional Director of Income-tax (International Taxation), Mangalore* RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND JASON P. BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER S.P. NOS. 223 TO 225 (BANG.) OF 2014 [ASSESSMENT YEAR ] NOVEMBER 14, 2014 Section 9, read with section 54, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and article 6 of the OECD Model Convention - Income - Deemed to accrue or arise in India (Income from immovable property) - Assessment year Whether where assessee purchased a property from a non-resident, since assessee was aware of fact that capital gain arising from sale of said property was not taxable in hands of vendor as he had already invested amount in purchase of another residential property within time period prescribed under section 54, assessee was not required to deduct tax at source while making payment of sales consideration to non-resident vendor - Held, yes [Para 10] [In favour of assessee] Circulars, Notifications and Instructions : Instruction No. 2/2014, dated FACTS HELD During relevant year, assessee purchased a residential property from a non-resident. The assessee's case was that in respect of payments made by him, the nature of income chargeable to tax ought to be embedded, only then he was required to deduct the TDS. The assessee further explained that since non-resident vendor was eligible to claim deduction under section 54 in respect of capital gain arising from sale of property, he was not required to deduct tax at source while making payment in question. The Assessing Officer opined that on sale of the house property, capital gain tax would be chargeable in the hands of the recipient, therefore, the element of income was quite involved in the payment. It was a different matter that the recipient was entitled for deduction under section 54. He thus held the assessees was in default and raised a demand under section 201. The Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed the order of Assessing Officer. On second appeal:
2 The ultimate levy of taxes is dependent upon many circumstances such as exemption, deduction etc. However, in the present case when the assessee has made payments,he was sure because of the facts brought to his notice that these payments does not involve payment of taxes, as the vendor is entitled for exemption. The vendors are the family members. They have apprised the assessee's about the investment. They must have pointed out that no liability of taxes would be there. Therefore, there was no need to deduct the TDS. The facts of the present case ought to be seen by the Commissioner (Appeals) in the light of the Instruction No. 2/2014 dated [Para 8] If one examines the facts of the present case in the light of paragraph No. 3 of said instruction, then it would indicate that the Assessing Officer is required to determine the appropriate propotion of the sum chargeable to tax as mentioned in sub section (1) of section 195 to ascertain the tax liability on which the deductor shall be deemed to be an assessee in default under section 201 and the appropriate proportion of the sum will depend on the facts and circumstances of each case. In the present case from the date of the payment assessee was aware that the amount will qualify for exemption under section 54 because the vendors has already made investment in purchase of the house property. She has represented these facts to the assessee. [Para 9] The facts on record indicate that from the date of payments, parties were aware that these payments would not be subject to taxes, because of exemption. Therefore, there was no need to deduct the taxes. In view of the above, the appeal is allowed by holding that the assessee cannot be treated as assessee in default under section 201. Consequently, no interest under section 201(1A) will be imposable upon them. [Para 10] CASE REVIEW GE India Technology Cen. (R) Ltd. v. CIT [2010] 327 ITR 456/193 Taxman 234/7 taxmann.com 18 (SC) (para 1) followed. CASES REFERRED TO GE India Technology Cen. (R) Ltd. v. CIT [2010] 327 ITR 456/193 Taxman 234/7 taxmann.com 18 (SC) (Para 1). V. Srinivasan, CA for the Appellant. Dr. Shankar Prasad, (DR) for the Respondent. ORDER 1. The present stay applications are directed at the instance of the appellants for grant of ad interim stay of the outstanding demand during the pendency of appeals. However, while going through the record, we deem it appropriate to hear the appeals itself, because the issue involved in all the three appeals is common and covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of GE India Technology Cen. (P) Ltd. v. CIT [2010] 327 ITR 456/193 Taxman 234/7 taxmann.com 18 r.w. instruction No.2/2014 dated issued by the Board. Therefore, with the consent of both the representatives, we heard the appeals itself. 2. The common question involved in all the appeals is whether the appellants can be treated in default for not deducting the TDS while making payments to the non resident Mrs.Zohra Moidin, resulting the demand of tax against the assessees as well as interest u/s 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act.
3 3. The brief facts of the case are that Mr. Ahmed Mohiuddin and Mrs. Shahanaz Mohiuddin are the directors of the Company M/s Sami Reality and Infrastructures (P) Ltd. They have jointly executed a purchase deed on with the vendors of the property at Mangalore which was jointly owned by Mrs. Zohra Moidin and Mrs. Sayeeda Amir Ali. The property was purchased for a consideration of Rs.2,57,24,000. The dispute is that Mrs. Zohra Moidin is a non resident and before making payment to her, the TDS u/s 195(1) ought to have been deducted by the assessee. Since they failed to deduct the TDS, therefore, they are "assessee in default" and a notice u/s 201 was served upon the assessee. The contention of the assessees before the learned Asstt. Director of Income Tax (International Taxation) was that at the time of execution of sale deed and payments of consideration, it was represented by Mrs. Zohra Moidum that she had purchased a house property on which is within one year prior to the date of sale deed being executed She has represented that the consideration paid for acquisition of residential hosue was of Rs.1.50 crores and the cost of stamp paper and registration charges was a sum of Rs.12,30,475/-. Thus, she had made investment in the new residential house at Rs.1,62,30,475/- which was eligible for exemption u/s 54 of the Income Tax Act. Thus according to the assessee, in the payments made by them, the nature of income chargeable to tax ought to be embedded, only then they are required to deduct the TDS, since no such income was embedded upon which the taxes are to be levied. Therefore, they have not deducted the TDS. 4. The learned Assessing Officer has observed that section 195 contain in itself a procedure where an assessee feels necessity of any clarification on account of non deduction of taxes, he can move an application u/s 195(2) or 195(3). Section 195(1) mandate the assessee to deduct the TDS while making payment to any non resident. With regard to assessee's contention that element of income ought to be involved in the payment is concerned, the learned Assessing Officer has observed that there is a perceptional difference between construction of this expression available in section 195(1) of the Act, the expression "sum chargeable to tax", is not dependent upon the ultimately payment of tax by the receipient. There can be so many reasons, where receipient can be exempted from payment of taxes like deduction, exemption etc., but the element of income in the payment is involved. The Assessing Officer has emphasized that on sale of the house property, capital gain tax would be chargeable in the hands of the receipient, therefore, the element of income is quite involved in the payment. It is a different matter that the receipient was entitle for exemption u/s 54. In this way the Assessing Officer has held the assessees in default and raised a demand u/s 201. He also charged interest u/s 201(1A). 5. Appeals to the CIT (A) did not bring any relief to the assessee. 6. Before us the learned Counsel for the assessee placed on record copy of the assessment order passed in the case of Mrs. Zohra Moidin. He also placed on record copy of the circular No.2/2014 issued on He pointed out that after the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of GE India Technology Cen (P) Ltd (supra), the TDS in the payments required to be made u/s 195(1) ought to be deducted, if the element of income in such payment is involved. The Board has considered this aspect and thereafter laid down the guidelines. The Board has appriased its Officers that while treating any assessee in default u/s 201 of the Act and determination of appropriate portion of the sum will depend on the facts and circumstances of each case taking into account the nature of remitance. In this case the vendors have made investment in house property in the month of May, This investment was made within the window period for claiming exemption u/s 54 of the Act. Therefore, when they sold the property they were aware that the amount which the vendors are receiving will not be charged to capital gain tax. The assessee was also aware that the payments does not involve any sum upon which taxes would be levied. In such situation, the assessee cannot be treated in default u/s 201 of the Income Tax Act. 7. The learned DR on the other hand relied upon the assessment order. He pointed out that there is a basic difference between the taxes required to be paid ultimately by an assessee vis-à-vis the income accrued or arising to such an assessee. In the payments made by the assessees, the element of income was very much
4 there. It is a different matter that the vendors have made investment, therefore, that would qualify for exemption under other sections of the Income Tax Act. He further pointed out that, had the vendors have not purchased in the month of May, 2011 and they had intention to purchase in subsequetn year within the limitation provided in section 54, then what would be the situation. The assessee's ought to have deducted the tax in that circumstance. Thus, the assessees ought to have not taken a decision at their own level. They should have approacehd the Income Tax Officer u/s 195(2) or 195(3). 8. We have duly considered the rival contentions and gone through the record carefully. We appreciate the approach of the learned Assessing Officer that ultimate payments of tax by the recipient may not be the criteria for arriving at a conclusion; whether the payments involved element of taxes or not. The ultimate levy of taxes is dependent upon many circumstances such as exemption, deduction etc. However, in the present case when the appellants have made payments, they were sure because of the facts brought to their notice that these payments does not involve payment of taxes. The vendor is entitled for exemption. There could be a circumstance; where vendors have some other capital gain which could be adjusted against the investment in house property?, but the vendors are the family members. They have apprised the assessee's about the investment. They must have pointed out that no liablity of taxes would be there. Therefore, no need to deduct the TDS. The facts of the present case ought to be seen by the learned CIT (A) in the light of the circular issued by the Board because before the Assessing Officer the circular was not in the picture. The circular read as under: "Instruction No. 02/2014, Dated Sub: Deduction of tax at source under Section 195 read with Sections 201 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 relating to payment made to a non-resident-reg. Section 195 of the Income-tax Act (hereafter referred to as 'the Act') provides that any person, responsible for paying to a non-resident not being a company or to a foreign company, any sum chargeable under the provisions of this Act, shall at the time of credit of such income to the account of the payee or at the time of payment thereof, whichever is earlier, deduct income-tax thereon at the rates in force. Section 201 of the Act inter alia provides that any person who is required to deduct tax in accordance with the provisions of the Act, does not do so, shall he deemed to be an assessee in default and shall also be liable to pay simple interest at the specified rate. 2. References were received from field officers on the issue of deduction of tax at source under section 195 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 in the light of the decisions of the Supreme Court of India in the case of GE India Technology Private Limited v. CIT 327 (ITR) 456 and Transmission Corporation of AP Ltd. v. CIT [1999] 299 ITR 587 (SC), and the decision of the Madras High Court in CIT v. Chennai Metropolitan Water Tax Cases Appeals Nos of 2005, with a request for clarification as to whether the tax is to be deducted under subsection (1) of section 195 on the whole sum being remitted to a non-resident or only the portion representing the sum chargeable to tax, particularly if no application has been made under subsection 2) of section 195 of the Act to determine the sum. 3. The matter has been examined in the Board and accordingly, in exercise of powers vested under Section 119 of the Act, the Board hereby directs that in a case where the assessee fails to deduct tax under section 195 of the Act, the Assessing Officer shall determine the appropriate proportion of the sum chargeable to tax as mentioned in subsection (1) of section 195 to ascertain the tax liability on which the deductor shall be deemed to be an assessee in default under section 201 of the Act, and the appropriate proportion of the sum will depend on the facts and circumstances of each case taking into account nature of remittances, income component therein or any other fact relevant to determine such appropriate proportion.
5 4. The undersigned is directed to state that the above position may be brought to the notice of all officers concerned. F. No. 500/33/2013-FTD-I Yours faithfully, (Satya Pal Kumar) Under Secretary-1(2) [FT&TR-l]" 9. If we examine the facts of the present case in the light of paragraph No.3 of the circular, then it could indicate that the Assessing Officer is required to determine the appropriate proportion of the sum chargeable to tax as mentioned in sub-section (1) of section 195 to ascertain the tax liability on which the deductor shal be deemed to be an assessee in default u/s 201 of the Act and the appropriate proportion of the sum will depend on the facts and circumstances of each case. In the present case from the date of the payment vendees were aware that the amount will qualify for exemption u/s 54 because the vendors has already made investment in purchase of the house property. She has represented these facts to the assessee. At this stage, it is pertinent to make reference of the assessment order passed in the case of Smt. Zohra Moidin u/s 143(3). The relevant part read as under: "3. During the coruse of proceedings, it has been observed that the assessee along with her siser Mrs. Saida Amir Ali had sold immovable properties inherited from her father for a total sale consideration of rs.2,57,24,000/- during the relevant previous eyar. The transctions were registered vide two sale deeds both dated (Regd. As Doc. No.5062 and Doc. No.5065) in respect of land to the extent of acres and residential building with appurtenant land measuring 1.73 acres respectively. As per the affidavit submitted by the assessee, she had 2/3rd right in the said properties and her sister Mrs. Saida Amir Ali had 1/3rd right. The property comprising land only has been sold for a consideration of Rs.2,00,00,000/- and the second property comprising residential buildign and land has been sold for a consideration of Rs.57,24,000/-. The total capital gains has been shown at Rs.2,25,55,466/- after claiming expenses incurred for conversion fees and brokerage to the extent of Rs.8,00,000/- and indexed cost of acquisition of Rs.23,68,534/-. The assessee has declared her share (2/3) of LTCG at Rs.1,50,36,977/-. As she has purchased a residential house with land for Rs.1,50,00,000/- within one year (on ) before the date of sale ( ) of the said properties for which she has incurred stamp and registration charges of Rs.12,30,475/- she has declared the total cost of the new asst at Rs.1,62,30,475/- and claimed the entire amount of her share of LTCG of Rs.1,50,36,977/- as exempt u/s 54 and 54F. 4. After considering the details furnished and the submissions of the assessee, the assessment is concluded by accepting the income as per the return filed on Subject to the above remarks and the data made available, the total income and tax payable by the assessee is computed as under: Long term capital gains Total Income Less: Pre-paid taxes Balance refundable/payable 10. The above facts indicate that from the date of payments, parties were aware that these payments would not be subject to taxes, because of exemption. Therefore, there was no need to deduct the taxes. In view of the above facts, we allow all the three appeals and hold that the appellants cannot be treated as assessee in default u/s 201. Consequently no interest u/s 201(1A) will be imposable upon them. 11. Since we have decided the appeals, therefore, the stay applications become redundant and dismissed. Nil Nil Nil Nil"
6 SUNIL *In favour of assessee.
IN THE ITAT BANGALORE BENCH C. Vinay Mishra. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax. IT Appeal No. 895 (Bang.) of s.p. no. 124 (Bang.
IN THE ITAT BANGALORE BENCH C Vinay Mishra v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax IT Appeal No. 895 (Bang.) of 2012 s.p. no. 124 (Bang.) of 2012 [ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10] OCTOBER 12, 2012 ORDER Jason
More informationG.A no.1150 of 2015 ITAT no.52 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE
G.A no.1150 of 2015 ITAT no.52 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata-2 Versus M/s. G K K Capital Markets (P) Limited
More information2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a company engaged in the business of dealing farm equipments, machinery, spares, wind power ge
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Bangalore B Bench, Bangalore Before Shri Rajpal Yadav, Judicial Member and Shri Jason P. Boaz, Accountant Member ITA No.14/Bang/2013 (Assessment year:2008-09) M/s Ratnagiri
More informationIn the High Court of Judicature at Madras. Date : The Hon'ble Mr. Justice R. Sudhakar and The Honble Ms. Justice K.B.K.
In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Date : 14.07.2015 The Hon'ble Mr. Justice R. Sudhakar and The Honble Ms. Justice K.B.K. Vasuki T.C.A. No: 398 of 2007 M/s. Anusha Investments Ltd. 8 Haddows Road
More informationTDS under section 195 of the Income-tax Act. CA Vishal Palwe 16 December 2017 Seminar on International Taxation at WIRC
TDS under section 195 of the Income-tax Act CA Vishal Palwe 16 December 2017 Seminar on International Taxation at WIRC Overview of section 195 Overview of section 195 195(1) Any person paying to non-resident
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH, AGRA. ITA No.450/Ag/2015 Assessment Year:
1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. ANNAPURNA MEHROTRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.450/Ag/2015 Assessment Year:2009-2010 ITO (TDS),
More informationmore than the capital gains and the new residential asset was purchased within 2 years from the date of sale of residential property. 3. The Learned C
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad B Bench, Hyderabad Before Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, Judicial Member AND Shri S.Rifaur Rahman, Accountant Member ITA No.1707/Hyd/2016 (Assessment Year: 2013-14)
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES A, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI D. MANMOHAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES A, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI D. MANMOHAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 1149/HYD/2015 Assessment Year: 2008-09,
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOs OF 2010 (Arising out of SLP(C) No of 2009)
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOs.7541-7542 OF 2010 (Arising out of SLP(C) No. 34306-34307 of 2009) GE India Technology Centre Private Ltd.. Appellant(s) Versus
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE BENCH B BEFORE SHRI JASON P BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI N V VASUDEVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
Page 1 of 13 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE BENCH B BEFORE SHRI JASON P BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI N V VASUDEVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER (Asst. year 2005-06) M/s Synopsys International
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad A Bench, Hyderabad
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad A Bench, Hyderabad Before Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, Judicial Member AND Shri S.Rifaur Rahman, Accountant Member Smt. Nama Chinnamma Hyderabad PAN: ABKPW 1887
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX MATTER. ITA No.798 /2007. Judgment reserved on: 27th March, 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX MATTER ITA No.798 /2007 Judgment reserved on: 27th March, 2008 Judgment delivered on:7th April, 2008 Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi-II, New
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH : BANGALORE. BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER and SHRI JASON P BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER and SHRI JASON P BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.726/Bang/2014 (Assessment year: 2005-06) M/s.B & B Infotech
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES, CHANDIGARH
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI H.L.KARWA, HON'BLE VICE PRESIDENT & MS. RANO JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 648 & 649/Chd/2014 Assessment years : 2010-11
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE BENCH B BEFORE SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE BENCH B BEFORE SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.971/Bang/2015 (Asst. Year 2011-12 ) M/s Sevasadan
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHE A, PUNE BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI R.S. PADVEKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHE A, PUNE BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI R.S. PADVEKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER M/s Malpani Estates, S.No.150, Malpani House, Indira Gandhi Marg,
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU PRESENT THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL AND THE HON BLE MRS.JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA. ITA No.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17 TH DAY OF MARCH 2016 PRESENT THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL AND THE HON BLE MRS.JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA BETWEEN: ITA No.660/2015 1. THE
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH. ITR No.192/1997 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JABALPUR. M/s VINDHYA TELELINKS LTD JUDGEMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH ITR No.192/1997 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JABALPUR Vs M/s VINDHYA TELELINKS LTD Krishn Kumar Lahoti and Smt Sushma Shrivastava JUDGEMENT Dated: February 22, 2011 The
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH D, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, AM And Smt. Beena A. Pillai, JM
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH D, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, AM And Smt. Beena A. Pillai, JM : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Income Tax Officer, TDS Rohtak (APPELLANT) PAN No. RTKPO1586E
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX MATTER. Income Tax Appeal No. 1167/2011. Reserved on: 21st October, 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX MATTER Income Tax Appeal No. 1167/2011 Reserved on: 21st October, 2011 Date of Decision: 8th November, 2011 The Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi-IV,
More informationA COMPLETE ANALYSIS OF THE FINANCE ACT, 2013 PART - VI (Chapter XIII & XIV of the IT Act)
A COMPLETE ANALYSIS OF THE FINANCE ACT, 2013 PART - VI (Chapter XIII & XIV of the IT Act) Prepared by Advocates of M/s Subbaraya Aiyar, Padmanabhan & Ramamani (SAPR) Advocates 13. CHAPTER XIII Income Tax
More informationBEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI RAJENDRA, AM
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI G BENCH MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI RAJENDRA, AM ITA No. 5994/Mum/2010 (Asst Year 2005-06) 23 Atlanta - Nariman Point Mumbai
More informationBefore Sh. J. S. Reddy, AM And Sh. George George K., JM
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH A, NEW DELHI Before Sh. J. S. Reddy, AM And Sh. George George K., JM : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-7 New Delhi
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE A BENCH, BANGALORE
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE A BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SMT P.MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ABRAHAM P GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.220 & 1043(BNG.)/2013 (Assessment year
More informationCIVIL APPELLATE/ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL Nos OF 2004
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE/ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 516-527 OF 2004 Brij Lal & Ors.... Appellants versus Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar... Respondents with Civil
More informationPravin Balubhai Zala v. ITO ()
(2010) 129 TTJ 0373 :(2010) 033 (II) ITCL 0318 :(2010) 036 DTR 0290 :ITAT Mumbai C Bench Pravin Balubhai Zala v. ITO () INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 --Assessment--ValidityNotice under section 142(1) by non-jurisdictional
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH B, HYDERABAD
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH B, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI P.MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 503/Hyd/2012 Assessment Year: 2008-09,
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL AND THE HON BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA. ITA. No.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU BETWEEN: DATED THIS THE 1 st DAY OF APRIL 2016 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL AND THE HON BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA ITA. No.653/2015 C/W
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI, HON BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, HON BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER (Asst. Year : 2009-10) DCIT, Circle-1(1), Panaji.
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH H : NEW DELHI VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH H : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.D.AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1580/Del/2010 Assessment Year : 2004-05 05 M/s
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH I, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH I, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2005-06 DCIT, Cir. 6(1), R.No.506, 5 th
More informationC.R. Building, I.P. Estate
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: D NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R. P. TOLANI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI J. S. REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 364/Del/2012 Assessment Years: 2008-09 ACIT Vs.
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX ACT. INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 171/2001. Date of decision: 18th July, 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX ACT INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 171/2001 Date of decision: 18th July, 2014 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX... Petitioner Through Mr. Balbir Singh, Sr.
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI BEFORE SHRI P.K. BANSAL, HON BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI D.T. GARASIA, HON BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOS. 194, 195 & 287/ PNJ/2014 : (ASST. YEARS
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B, PUNE BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.2220
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B, PUNE BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER (Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11) Asstt. Commissioner of Income
More information$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % DECIDED ON: versus
$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % DECIDED ON: 25.02.2015 + ITA 117/2015 JOINT INVESTMENTS PVT LTD... Appellant Through: Mr. Piyush Kaushik, Advocate. versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX...
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, CHENNAI
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, CHENNAI BEFORE Dr. O.K. NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 305/Mds/2013 (Assessment Year: 2009-10) Deputy Commissioner
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF AUGUST 2012 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE BETWEEN: DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF AUGUST 2012 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.SREEDHAR RAO AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.MANOHAR ITA No.1081/2006 1. THE
More informationCommissioner of Income Tax 18 } Appellant versus Sambhaji Nagar Co op. Hsg. Society Ltd. } Respondent
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1356 OF 2012 Commissioner of Income Tax 18 } Appellant versus Sambhaji Nagar Co op. Hsg. Society Ltd.
More information2 Andheri (West), Mumbai The working of the long-term capital gains was given to the ITO. As per the working 50% was given to the assessee amo
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE Room No.09, C Block, 3 rd Floor, Hari Niwas, L J Road, Shivaji Park, Dadar (W), Mumbai 400 028 SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM (Assessment Year :2010-11)
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES D, MUMBAI. Before Shri B R Baskaran, AM & Shri Amit Shukla, JM
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES D, MUMBAI Before Shri B R Baskaran, AM & Shri Amit Shukla, JM ITA No.1284/Mum/2013 Assessment Year : 2009-10 Dharmayug Investments Ltd. The Times of
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX ACT, Date of Decision: 23rd February, ITA 1222/2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 Date of Decision: 23rd February, 2012. ITA 1222/2011 CIT... Appellant Through: Ms. Suruchi Aggarwal, Sr. Standing Counsel. versus
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH "F : NEW DELHI. Before Shri. G. E. Veerabhadrappa, VP and Shri. George Mathan, JM
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH "F : NEW DELHI Before Shri. G. E. Veerabhadrappa, VP and Shri. George Mathan, JM ITA No. 3198/D/2004 Asst Year: 1999-2000 GE Capital Services India, AIFACS
More information$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 9. + W.P.(C) 6422/2013 & CM No.14002/2013 (Stay) versus. With W.P.(C) 4558/2014.
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 9. + W.P.(C) 6422/2013 & CM No.14002/2013 (Stay) INDORAMA SYNTHETICS (INDIA) LTD.... Petitioner Through: Mr. Ajay Vohra, Senior Advocate with Ms. Kavita Jha
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: H : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI I.C. SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: H : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI I.C. SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1322 /Del/2012 Assessment Year: 2003-04 Asstt.
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE. ITA No.3209 of 2005 ITA No.3165 of ITA No.3209 of 2005
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE ITA No.3209 of 2005 ITA No.3165 of 2005 ITA No.3209 of 2005 1) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX C R BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD BANGALORE 2) JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE DILIP B.BHOSALE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.MANOHAR ITA NO.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 05 TH DAY OF MARCH 2014 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE DILIP B.BHOSALE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.MANOHAR BETWEEN: ITA NO.828/2007 H.Raghavendra
More informationTDS on Payments to Non-residents under section 195 Law and Procedures
Study Course on International Taxation for Beginners Organised by - Western India Regional Council of the Institute Chartered Accountants of India TDS on Payments to Non-residents under section 195 Law
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH 'B' NEW DELHI. ITA Nos.2337 & 4337/Del/2010 Assessment Years: &
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH 'B' NEW DELHI ITA Nos.2337 & 4337/Del/2010 Assessment Years: 2006-07 & 2007-2008 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-11(1), NEW DELHI Vs M/s ENERGY INFRASTRUCTURE
More information$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI R-67. versus M/S ERICSSON COMMUNICATIONS LTD.
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI R-67 + ITA 106/2002 DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX... Appellant versus M/S ERICSSON COMMUNICATIONS LTD.... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant
More informationAt the time of Sec. 80G approval object of trust needs to be examined without considering application of income
At the time of Sec. 80G approval object of trust needs to be examined without considering application of income Citation: Commissioner of Income-tax, Rajkot-III v. Vipassana Trust Court: HIGH COURT OF
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES B : HYDERABAD
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES B : HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.No.848/Hyd/2015 Assessment Year 2010-2011
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH: AGRA BEFORE SHRI A. D. JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH: AGRA BEFORE SHRI A. D. JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (ASSESSMENT YEARs.-2010-11 & 2011-12) ACIT, Circle-1, Agra. (Revenue)
More informationForeign Collaboration
CHAPTER 17 Foreign Collaboration Some Key Points (a) The tax liability of a foreign collaborator and the Indian counter part is dependent on their residential status and the applicable provisions of DTAA,
More informationCommissioner of Income-Tax Vs. Punjab Chemical & Crop Protection Ltd
Commissioner of Income-Tax Vs. Punjab Chemical & Crop Protection Ltd Judgement: 1. Ajay Kumar Mittal, J. - This appeal has been preferred by the Revenue under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA. [ Coram : Bhavnesh Saini, JM, and Pramod Kumar, AM]
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA I.T.A. No.: 448 to 454/Agra/2011 [ Coram : Bhavnesh Saini, JM, and Pramod Kumar, AM] I.T.A. No.:448 to 454/Agra/2011 Assessment year: 2001-02 to 2007-08
More informationPayment of Export commission to Non-Resident Agent :-
Common Disputes:- Payment of Export commission to Non-Resident Agent :- Relevant Bare Act, Rules & Circulars:- Other Sums 195. [(1) Any person responsible for paying to a non-resident, not being a company,
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE. Dated this the 17 th day of June 2014 PRESENT THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE N KUMAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE Dated this the 17 th day of June 2014 PRESENT THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE N KUMAR AND THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE B. MANOHAR ITA No. 578 of 2008 BETWEEN: 1. The Commissioner
More informationH A R B I N G E R. B D Jokhakar & Co. Chartered Accountants October Updates on regulatory changes affecting your business
October 2014 B D Jokhakar & Co. Chartered Accountants www.bdjokhakar.com INDEX Sr. No Topics covered Page No. 1 Company Law 3 2 Reserve Bank of India 4 4 Income Tax 5 5 Service Tax 6 7 Summary of Judgments
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C. SHARMA, AM AND SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C. SHARMA, AM AND SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM (Assessment Year: 2009-10) Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax- 10(1), Mumbai.455, Aayakar Bhavan,
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B, PUNE BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B, PUNE BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER The Solapur District Central Co-op. Bank Ltd., 207-209,
More informationITA No.681 & 824/Kol/2015-M/s. Kalyani Barter (P)Ltd. A.Y
ITA No.681 & 824/Kol/2015-M/s. Kalyani Barter (P)Ltd. A.Y.2010-11 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH D KOLKATA Before Hon ble Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member and Shri S.S.Viswanethra
More informationTHE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: ITA 232/2014 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VI
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 21.05.2014 + ITA 232/2014 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VI... Appellant versus WORLDWIDE TOWNSHIP PROJECTS LTD... Respondent Advocates who appeared
More informationITA no. 3279/Mum./2008 (Assessment Year : ) Revenue by : Mr. Ajit Kumar Jain Assessee by : Mr. Firoze B. Andhyarujina
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL L BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. MITTAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA no. 3279/Mum./2008 (Assessment Year : 2003-04) Dy. Commissioner
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: G NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G. D. AGRAWAL, PRESIDENT AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER
1 ITA Nos. 6675 & 6676/Del/2015 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: G NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G. D. AGRAWAL, PRESIDENT AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 6675/DEL/2015 ( A.Y 2013-14)
More information$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ITA 607/2015. versus AND ITA 608/2015. versus
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 12. + ITA 607/2015 PR. COMMISSIONER OFINCOME TAX... Appellant Through: Mr. Kamal Sawhney, Senior Standing counsel with Mr. Raghvendra Singh and Mr.Shikhar Garg,
More informationTax Withholding Section 195 and CA certification
Tax Withholding Section 195 and CA certification October 1, 2011 Bijal Desai Presentation Outline Non-resident payments Withholding tax Lower or NIL withholding of tax CA Certification Consequences of
More informationTax-treatment and TDS, in respect of remuneration payable to an employee of an Indian Company, located abroad
Tax-treatment and TDS, in respect of remuneration payable to an employee of an Indian Company, located abroad 1 Tax-treatment and TDS, in respect of salary, bonus and incentive, receivable by the CEO of
More informationTHE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment delivered on: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX. - versus M/S ZORAVAR VANASPATI LIMITED
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 24.07.2009 + ITA 596/2005 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Appellant - versus M/S ZORAVAR VANASPATI LIMITED... Respondent Advocates who appeared
More information(Per: Tarun Agarwala, J.)
AFR Reserved Income Tax Appeal No.174 of 2015 Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Agra... Appellant Vs. Smt. Dimpal Yadav, Etawah... Respondent With Income Tax Appeal No.71 of 2013 Commissioner of Income Tax-II,
More informationTax Wire. Bollywood Badshah's tryst with the tax department!
Tax Wire Bollywood Badshah's tryst with the tax department! 07th April, 2017 Bollywood Badshah's tryst with the tax department! Background Mr. Shahrukh Khan (hereinafter referred to as Mr. Khan/the assessee
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH C CHENNAI
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH C CHENNAI BEFORE SHRI PRADEEP PARIKH, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI N. BARATHVAJA SANKAR, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER (SPECIAL BENCH CASE)
More informationBEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM MOHAN REDDY
1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 11 th DAY OF MARCH, 2013 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM MOHAN REDDY WRIT PETITION NO. 16136 OF 2011 (T-IT) BETWEEN: M/S. UB GLOBAL CORPORATION
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH B, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH B, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 1743/Hyd/2013 Assessment Year : 2009-10 Bellwether
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH B BENCH BEFORE SHRI B.R.MITTAL(JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI RAJENDRA (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER)
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH B BENCH BEFORE SHRI B.R.MITTAL(JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI RAJENDRA (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 1999-2000 Bennett Coleman & Co.Ltd., The Times
More informationAppellant :- Commissioner Of Income Tax, Meerut And Another
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD Court No. - 33 Case:- INCOME TAX APPEAL No. - 73 of 2001 Appellant :- Commissioner Of Income Tax, Meerut And Another Respondent :- M/S Jindal Polyester & Steel Ltd.
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 18.05.2009 Present: Ms Prem Lata Bansal, Mr Sanjeev Rajpal and Ms Anshul Sharma, Advocates for Appellant. Mr B. Gupta, Advocate for Respondent..LHHH;lsfsakljflsdaH..;fdsfjkdskl;jsfdsfjk
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH G, MUMBAI
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH G, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER O/o. Income Tax Officer 2(1)(1) Room
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGNAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1017 OF 2011
PNP 1 WP1017-8.11.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGNAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1017 OF 2011 The Indian Hume Pipe Co. Ltd...Petitioner. versus The Assistant Commissioner
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ITA 605/2012. CIT... Appellant. Through: Mr Sanjeev Rajpal, Sr. Standing Counsel. versus ORIENTAL STRUCTURAL
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ITA 605/2012 CIT... Appellant Through: Mr Sanjeev Rajpal, Sr. Standing Counsel. versus ORIENTAL STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS PVT LTD... Respondent Through: Mr Rajat Navet
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES, D, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.S.SYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES, D, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.S.SYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 2210/Mum/2010 (Assessment Years: 2006-07) Renu Hingorani
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO OF 2017 VERSUS WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.9365 OF 2017 VERSUS WITH
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.15613 OF 2017 M/S. NEW OKHLA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEALS & ORS. WITH RESPONDENT(S)
More informationTHE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 28.11.2011 + ITA 938/2011 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX... Appellant versus AMADEUS INDIA PVT LTD... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH K, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S.PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH K, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S.PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 859/MUM/2014 Thomas Cook (India) Limited, Thomas Cook
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX ACT. Reserved on: 19th March, Date of Decision: 25th April, 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 3891/2013 SUBJECT : INCOME TAX ACT Reserved on: 19th March, 2014 Date of Decision: 25th April, 2014 SAMSUNG INDIA ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD... Petitioner Through
More information2 the order passed by the AO dated for AY , on the following grounds:- 1 : Re.: Treating the reimbursement of the expenses as income
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "L" Bench, Mumbai Shri C.N. Prasad (Judicial Member) & Before Shri Ashwani Taneja (Accountant Member) ITA No.4659/Mum/2014-2009-10 ITA No.385/Mum/2016-2011-12 Dy.CIT
More informationDIRECT TAX UPDATE JULY, SUMMARY OF JUDGEMENTS KNAV is a firm of International Accountants, Tax and Business Advisors. Domestic case laws:
JULY, 2015 DIRECT TAX UPDATE SUMMARY OF JUDGEMENTS KNAV is a firm of International Accountants, Tax and Business Advisors. Presence in INDIA USA UK FRANCE NETHERLANDS SWITZERLAND CANADA E: admin@knavcpa.com
More informationACCOUNTING & TAXATION ISSUES RELATING TO CAPITAL MARKET TRANSACTIONS CAPITAL MARKET TRANSACTIONS
ACCOUNTING & TAXATION ISSUES RELATING TO CAPITAL MARKET TRANSACTIONS CAPITAL MARKET TRANSACTIONS CASH MARKET DERIVATIVE MARKET DELIVERY DAILY JOBBING FUTURE OPTIONS BASED (NO DELIVERY) INDEX STOCKS INDEX
More informationThe applicant Mrs.Smita Anand is an Indian citizen and a person of. Indian origin. She was working with Hewitt Associates(India) Private
THE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS (INCOME TAX) NEW DELHI Wednesday, 19 th February, 2014 A.A.R. No. 1091 of 2011 PRESENT Justice Dr. Arijit Pasayat (Chairman) Mr. TBC Rozara (Member) Name & address of
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL : NEW DELHI VICE PRESIDENT, SHRI S.V.MEHROTRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI SPECIAL BENCH C : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.D.AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT, SHRI S.V.MEHROTRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.5890/Del/2010
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS OF 2005 SRI S.N. WADIYAR (DEAD) THROUGH LR W I T H
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 6873-6881 OF 2005 SRI S.N. WADIYAR (DEAD) THROUGH LR...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX, KARNATAKA...RESPONDENT(S)
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES, B, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI P.M.JAGTAP, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA
Default u/s 194C does not result in s. 40(a)(ia) disallowance if TDS paid before due date of filing ROI Bapushaeb Nanasaheb Dhumal vs. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) The assessee made payments to sub-contractors during
More informationTax Deduction and Collection at Source
(iii) Ravi Kumar aged 67 years derived ` 6,00,000 as salary from his employer, XYZ Ltd. for the year ended 31-03- 2019. The following details are provided by him to the employer: Particulars ` Loss from
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM MOHAN REDDY
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 10 TH DAY OF APRIL, 2013 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM MOHAN REDDY WRIT PETITION NOS. 11535 37 OF 2013 (T-IT) BETWEEN: IBM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD. TAX APPEAL NO. 93 of 2000
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD TAX APPEAL NO. 93 of 2000 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.J.THAKER ================================================================
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU PRESENT THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE N.KUMAR AND THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE B.SREENIVASE GOWDA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25 TH DAY OF MARCH 2015 PRESENT THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE N.KUMAR AND THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE B.SREENIVASE GOWDA I.T.A.No.879/2008 c/w I.T.A.Nos.882/2008,
More informationTAX AUDIT POINTS TO BE CONSIDERED
TAX AUDIT POINTS TO BE CONSIDERED Contributed by : CA. Tejas Gangar As per section 44AB of the Income tax act, 1961 ( the Act ), certain persons are required to get their accounts audited till 30th September
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH G, NEW DELHI)
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH G, NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI J. S. REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI A. T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.1423 /Del/2013 Assessment year : 2008-09 Simran
More informationIncome from business as computed in the assessment order
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Cambay Electric Supply Industrial Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax Y.V. CHANDRACHUD, CJ. AND V.D. TULZAPURKAR, J. CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 785 AND 783 OF 1977 APRIL 11, 1978 S.T.
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: E : NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: E : NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/s. Ujagar Holdings Pvt. Ltd., 8-D,
More information