| INCOME TAX ACT | |||||||
| SECTION 2(22) | |||||||
| DEEMED DIVIDEND | |||||||
Loans or advances to shareholders : Where
 assessee was a shareholder in a company holding 41 per cent of shares 
and during year he and his son and daughter had overdrawn certain amount
 from said company and Assessing Officer treating said amount as deemed 
dividend under section 2(22)(e) added same in income of assessee, since 
both son and daughter were not shareholders in company and during year 
company got only negative accumulated profits, provisions of section 
2(22)(e) could not be invoked - [2016] 65 taxmann.com 255 (Kolkata - Trib.) 
 | |||||||
| SECTION 28(i) | |||||||
| BUSINESS INCOME - YEAR IN WHICH TAXABLE | |||||||
Upfront payments : Where
 assessee-port received non-refundable upfront premium from various 
parties for permitting them to develop various facilities such as 
docking of ships, loading and unloading of containers on land provided 
by it for a period of 30 years, entire amount of premium was to be 
brought to tax in assessment year in question itself - [2016] 65 taxmann.com 210 (Bangalore - Trib.) 
 | |||||||
| SECTION 37(1) | |||||||
| BUSINESS EXPENDITURE - YEAR IN WHICH DEDUCTIBLE | |||||||
Audit fees : Where
 assessee made contain provision in its profit and loss account in 
respect of accounting and auditing charges, matter was to be remanded 
back to Assessing Officer with direction to verify whether assessee was 
following practice of recognizing expenditure of audit fee pertaining to
 each year irrespective of actual payment and, if yes, then, it should 
not be disallowed for year under consideration - [2016] 65 taxmann.com 210 (Bangalore - Trib.) 
 | |||||||
| SECTION 55 | |||||||
| CAPITAL GAINS - COST OF ACQUISITION | |||||||
Trademark : Where
 assessee, during assessment year 1996-97, in terms of a settlement 
agreement entered into between it and an international company 'S', had 
transferred its trademark to 'S' for certain consideration, transfer of 
trademark was liable to tax under section 55(2)(a) only from 1-4-2002 
and not in assessment year in question -[2016] 65 taxmann.com 253 (Karnataka) 
 | |||||||
| SECTION 69A | |||||||
| UNEXPLAINED MONEYS | |||||||
Reopening of assessment : Where
 at time of making assessment, assessee disclosed all material facts 
relating to income assessable under section 69A, Assessing Officer could
 not initiate reassessment proceedings after expiry of four years from 
relevant year taking a view that addition under section 69A was deemed 
income of assessee and, thus, brought forward business loss and 
depreciation could not be set off against said income -[2016] 65 taxmann.com 221 (Madras) 
 | |||||||
| SECTION 80-IC | |||||||
| DEDUCTION - SPECIAL PROVISION IN RESPECT OF CERTAIN UNDERTAKINGS, OR ENTERPRISES IN CERTAIN SPECIAL CATEGORY STATES | |||||||
Manufacturing : Where
 end product is outcome of combination of employment of man and machine 
and after raw material goes through various processes, and is known 
commercially different article/thing/product, it is a manufacturing 
activity entitled for deduction under section 80-IC - [2016] 65 taxmann.com 191 (Mumbai - Trib.) 
 | |||||||
| SECTION 92C | |||||||
| TRANSFER PRICING - COMPUTATION OF ARMS LENGTH PRICE | |||||||
Where
 assessee claimed that copyright infringement settlement expenses paid 
to AE was to be allowed as deduction from operating cost of transactions
 entered into with said AE, it was to be concluded that unless 
expenditure was found to be not relating to normal business operations 
of assessee company, it could not be directed to be excluded from 
operating cost of assessee. Since all facts relating to issue in dispute
 were not on record i.e., whether infringement of copyright was with 
regard to international transactions and whether it formed part of 
operating expenditure or not, matter was to be remanded back to TPO/AO 
for disposal afresh - [2016] 65 taxmann.com 306 (Hyderabad - Trib.) 
 | |||||||
Comparables and adjustments/Adjustments – Interest : Domestic
 prime lending rate would have no applicability and it is LIBOR rate 
which has to be considered while determining arm's length interest rate 
in respect of an International transaction - [2016] 65 taxmann.com 240 (Hyderabad - Trib.) 
 | |||||||
Comparables and adjustments/Adjustments - Corporate guarantee : It
 would be appropriate to charge corporate guarantee fee at 0.50 per cent
 where assessee, through a common facilities agreement in connection 
with overseas acquisition of subsidiary companies, had provided 
corporate guarantee in favour of its AE - [2016] 65 taxmann.com 240 (Hyderabad - Trib.) 
 | |||||||
Comparables and adjustments/Adjustments – General : Adjustment
 arising out of Arm's Length Price (ALP) has to be restricted to only 
International Transactions with Associated Enterprise instead of entire 
turnover of assessee - [2016] 65 taxmann.com 155 (Bombay) 
 | |||||||
Comparables and adjustment/Comparables – Illustrations : A
 company, though in almost similar line of business functionally, ceases
 to be comparable, because of adoption of a different business model as 
per which activities are mostly outsourced - [2016] 65 taxmann.com 241 (Delhi - Trib.) 
 | |||||||
| SECTION 147 | |||||||
| INCOME ESCAPING ASSESSMENT – GENERAL | |||||||
Computation of limitation period : Proviso
 to section 147 does not use expression 'assessment' or 'reassessment' 
and, therefore, starting point for period of limitation cannot be date 
of assessment or revised assessment or reassessment - [2016] 65 taxmann.com 221 (Madras) 
 | |||||||
| SECTION 148 | |||||||
| INCOME ESCAPING ASSESSMENT - ISSUE OF NOTICE FOR | |||||||
Recording of reasons : Justification
 for reopening of assessment has to be tested only on strength of order 
recording reasons for reopening under section 148(2) - [2016] 65 taxmann.com 221 (Madras) 
 | |||||||
| SECTION 192 | |||||||
| DEDUCTION OF TAX AT SOURCE - SALARY | |||||||
Assessee-employer
 deducted TDS as per section 192 in respect of salary of the employees 
who failed to furnish their correct PAN. - [2016] 65 taxmann.com 292 (Visakhapatnam - Trib.) 
 | |||||||
| SECTION 271(1)(c) | |||||||
| PENALTY - FOR CONCEALMENT OF INCOME | |||||||
Estimation of income : Where
 Assessing Officer framed assessment of assessee for assessment year 
2007-08 under section 144 and after rejecting account books adopted net 
profit rate of 8 per cent, which was reduced by Tribunal to 7 per cent, 
and in mean time Assessing Officer also levied penalty under section 
271(1)(c), since assessee was an existing assessee and it did not file 
return for above assessment year and Assessing Officer and Tribunal 
adopted different estimates, no penalty under section 271(1)(c) was 
leviable upon assessee - [2016] 65 taxmann.com 248 (Chandigarh - Trib.) 
 | |||||||
| COMPANIES ACT | |||||||
| SECTION 10F | |||||||
| COMPANY LAW BOARD - APPEALS AGAINST THE ORDERS OF | |||||||
Where
 CLB dismissed interim relief sought by petitioner in petition alleging 
irregularity in election process of director and appeals against said 
order were dismissed, review petitions filed were to be dismissed as no 
new grounds had been made out and points agitated were already negated 
by Court in its earlier order - [2016] 65 taxmann.com 305 (Madras) 
 | |||||||
| SECTION 433 | |||||||
| WINDING UP - CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH A COMPANY MAY BE WOUND UP | |||||||
Where
 liability regarding payment of salary as claimed by petitioner in 
winding up petition was disputed by respondent-company on various 
grounds, company could not be ordered to be wound up under section 
433(e) -[2016] 65 taxmann.com 260 (Rajasthan) 
 | |||||||
| SERVICE TAX | |||||||
| SECTION 65(19) | |||||||
| TAXABLE SERVICES - BUSINESS AUXILIARY SERVICE | |||||||
Where
 assessee-bank acted as 'agency bank'/'receiving office' for sale of 
bonds issued by RBI, brokerage/commission earned would be taxable under 
head 'business auxiliary service'; as no custodial services were 
rendered, same could not be categorised as 'banking or other financial 
service' - [2016] 65 taxmann.com 242 (Mumbai - CESTAT) 
 | |||||||
Professional
 tea tasters engaged in: (a) fixing value of tea, (b) completion of 
negotiation between buyer and exporter and finalization of contract; (c)
 assisting in grading and standardization of tea; (d) monitoring 
shipment; (e) verifying shipment documents, port regulations and other 
formalities for export; (f) collecting sale proceeds, etc., are not 
'commission agent'; however, commission/consideration earned by them is 
liable to service tax under Business Auxiliary Services. - [2016] 65 taxmann.com 205 (Chennai - CESTAT) 
 | |||||||
| SECTION 65(25b) | |||||||
| TAXABLE SERVICES - COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL CONSTRUCTION SERVICES | |||||||
Interior
 services such as wooden and metal partition, plastering, painting, 
civil work, joinery items, floor and wall tiling, etc. in respect of 
buildings or civil structures are 'completion and finishing services' 
and not eligible for abatement; however, materials will not form part of
 value of services as per Not. 12/2003-ST - [2016] 65 taxmann.com 251 (New Delhi - CESTAT) 
 | |||||||
| SECTION 65(30a) | |||||||
| TAXABLE SERVICES - CONSTRUCTION OF COMPLEX SERVICES - STAY ORDER | |||||||
Where
 assessee was constructing independent residential buildings, which were
 not connected in plinth, had separate boundary wall, entrance and 
separate electricity and water connection, then, in absence of any 
common facilities, it could not prima facie be regarded as Construction 
of Complex service. - [2016] 65 taxmann.com 195 (New Delhi - CESTAT) 
 | |||||||
| SECTION 65(64) | |||||||
| TAXABLE SERVICES - MANAGEMENT, MAINTENANCE OR REPAIR SERVICES | |||||||
Providing
 technical engineers/software personnel to others amounts to manpower 
supply services and liable to service tax accordingly; it cannot be 
regarded as 'Information Technology Software Services' - [2016] 65 taxmann.com 198 (Chennai - CESTAT) 
 | |||||||
| SECTION 76 | |||||||
| PENALTY – GENERAL | |||||||
After
 issuance of Order-in-Original (OIO), adjudicating authority becomes 
functus officio; therefore, if penalty is not levied in OIO, he cannot 
issue addendum to said OIO to impose penalty without any notice to 
assessee -[2016] 65 taxmann.com 204 (New Delhi - CESTAT) 
 | |||||||
| SECTION 86 | |||||||
| APPEALS - MAINTAINABILITY OF - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL | |||||||
When
 pre-deposit order has been passed by Commissioner (Appeals) based on an
 incorrect fact, then, Commissioner (Appeals) has power to rectify said 
mistake apparent from record and, consequently, modify pre-deposit 
order. - [2016] 65 taxmann.com 195 (New Delhi - CESTAT) 
 | |||||||
  | 
Subscribe via Email 
Thursday, 28 January 2016
Daily Updates and News
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment