|
|
|
| SECTION 32 |
| DEPRECIATION - ALLOWANCE/RATE OF |
|
|
|
| SECTION 37(1) |
| BUSINESS EXPENDITURE - YEAR IN WHICH
DEDUCTIBLE |
Prior period expenses : Where
assessee had produced complete details before Commissioner (Appeals) in
respect of prior period expenses debited in profit and loss account and
receipt of bills in respective assessment years, same was to be allowed -
(2015) 58 taxmann.com 196 (Kolkata -
Trib.)
|
|
| SECTION 40(a)(ia) |
| BUSINESS DISALLOWANCE - INTEREST, ETC., PAID TO A RESIDENT
WITHOUT DEDUCTION OF TAX AT SOURCE |
Section 194C cases : No disallowance
can be made under section 40(a)(ia) on account of reimbursement of expenses
incurred by agent on behalf of assessee for transportation when obligation
to deduct tax at source was complied with by agent for and on behalf of
assessee - (2015) 58 taxmann.com 325 (Guwahati -
Trib.)
|
|
| SECTION 43B |
| BUSINESS DISALLOWANCE - CERTAIN DEDUCTIONS TO BE ALLOWED
ONLY ON ACTUAL PAYMENT |
PF/ESI : Where assessee deposited
provident fund on account of employees contribution before due date for
filing of return under section 139(1), Assessing Officer was not justified
in invoking section 43B - (2015) 58 taxmann.com 196 (Kolkata -
Trib.)
|
|
| SECTION 48 |
| CAPITAL GAINS - COMPUTAION OF |
Cost of acquisition : Where assessee
while computing indexed cost of acquisition had taken value of sold asset
as on 1-4-1981 at Rs. 280 per sq. ft. but as per Govt. notification value
was at Rs. 45 per sq. ft., assessing authority was right in recording
opinion that income chargeable to tax escaped assessment under section 147
- (2015) 58 taxmann.com 333 (Karnataka)
|
|
| SECTION 54F |
| CAPITAL GAINS - EXEMPTION OF, IN CASE OF INVESTMENT IN
RESIDENTIAL HOUSE |
Cost of additions/improvements :
Where asset acquired by assessee is habitable, cost of any
addition or improvements made on that asset is eligible for deduction under
section 54F - (2015) 58 taxmann.com 333 (Karnataka)
|
|
| SECTION 69C |
| UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE |
Bogus purchases : Where entire
purchases were made by bill and sales tax was paid thereupon and payments
to party were made by account payee cheques, addition on account of bogus
purchases was not justified - (2015) 58 taxmann.com 196 (Kolkata -
Trib.)
|
|
| SECTION 80-IA |
| DEDUCTIONS - PROFITS AND GAINS FROM INFRASTRUCTURE
UNDERTAKINGS |
Infrastructure undertaking : Where
pre-requisite conditions for allowance of deduction under section 80-IA(4)
had been satisfied in initial year, same could not be questioned in
succeeding years unless and until revenue disturbed finding for initial
assessment year - (2015) 58 taxmann.com 196 (Kolkata -
Trib.)
|
|
| SECTION 92C |
| TRANSFER PRICING - COMPUTATION OF ARM’S LENGTH
PRICE |
|
|
|
Comparables and adjustments/Comparables
– Illustrations : A company engaged in development and sale
of software products is incomparable to company engaged in software design
and development services - (2015) 58 taxmann.com 215 (Pune -
Trib.)
|
|
Comparables and adjustments/Comparables
– Illustrations : An entity which satisfies comparability
analysis even if it has a low margin which is reflective of a normal
business condition, should not be rejected solely on basis that there is a
dip in profit margin in comparison to other years - (2015) 58 taxmann.com 215 (Pune -
Trib.)
|
|
| SECTION 201 |
| DEDUCTION OF TAX AT SOURCE - CONSEQUENCE OF FAILURE TO
DEDUCT OR PAY |
Sub-section (1)/(1A) : Assessing
Officer couldn't treat payer as assessee-in-default without examining his
submission justifying non-deduction of tax - (2015) 58 taxmann.com 317 (Karnataka)
|
|
| SECTION 245C |
| SETTLEMENT COMMISSION - APPLICATION FOR SETTLEMENT OF
CASES |
Applicability of : Where at time of
filing application before Settlement Commission, assessment proceedings
were still pending and, moreover, disclosure of additional income appeared
to be prima facie full and true, impugned order passed by Settlement
Commission to proceed with application did not require any interference -
(2015) 58 taxmann.com 264 (Bombay)
|
|
| SECTION 245H |
| SETTLEMENT COMMISSION - IMMUNITY FROM
PROSECUTION/PENALTY |
Additional amount : Where there was
no material with department to justify a demand of further amount from
assessee and a sum was offered by assessee to put a quietus to matter,
order passed by Settlement Commission to grant immunity from penalty and
presecution in terms of section 245H could not be interfered with - (2015) 58 taxmann.com 315 (Kerala)
|
|
|
| COMPETITION ACT |
| SECTION 4 |
| PROHIBITION OF ABUSE OF DOMINANT
POSITION |
Where OP running radio taxi services under brand name
OLA was dominant in relevant market of radio taxi services in city of
Bengaluru and was offering huge discounts to its customers and incentives
to drivers at cost of bearing losses, OLA was following predatory pricing
to oust other players and was abusing its dominant position in relevant
market - (2015) 58 taxmann.com 250 (CCI) |
|
|
| SERVICE TAX |
| SECTION 86 |
| APPEALS - CONDONATION OF DELAY - APPELLATE
TRIBUNAL |
Delay in filing appeal due to misplacement of papers
in counsel's office must be condoned in interests of justice, as : (a)
appeal involved substantive issues, (b) delay was not mala fide and (c)
delay was not inordinate but only of 92 days - (2015) 58 taxmann.com 280 (Madras) |
|
|
| CENTRAL EXCISE ACT |
| SECTION 2(f) |
| MANUFACTURE - GENERAL MEANING |
'Lacquering and laminating' of films and converting it
into several shapes/sizes for use in packaging amounts to 'manufacture' and
therefore, credit may be taken and used for payment of duty thereon - (2015) 58 taxmann.com 190 (Bombay) |
|
|
| CUSTOMS ACT |
| SECTION 153 |
| SERVICE OF DECISIONS, ORDERS, SUMMONS,
ETC. |
When assessee has informed of his changed address to
department, service of order/notices, etc. ought to be effected at changed
address; hence, sending at old address cannot be regarded as complete
service so as to set time-limits in motion - (2015) 58 taxmann.com 155 (Bombay) |
|
|
| CST & VAT |
| SECTION 2(35) OF RAJASTHAN VALUE
ADDED TAX ACT, 2003 |
| SALE |
|
|
|
| SECTION 59 OF KARNATAKA VALUE
ADDED TAX ACT, 2003 |
| CIRCULARS/INSTRUCTIONS TO DEPARTMENTAL
OFFICERS |
Where first clarification dated 3-6-2006 had provided
that 'white oats were exempt' and subsequent clarification dated 20-1-2010
provided that 'white oats were taxable', said subsequent clarification
would be effective only from 20-1-2010 and no demand can be raised prior to
said date - (2015) 58 taxmann.com 233 (Karnataka) |
|
|
| CENTRAL EXCISE RULES |
| RULE 24 |
| CONFISCATION - SEIZURE OF GOODS, DOCUMENTS AND
THINGS |
Since return of cheques cannot be said to stifle or
impede investigation, hence, department was directed to release cheques
seized from assessee - (2015) 58 taxmann.com 243 (Delhi) |
|
|
|
