Services  |  Subscribe  |  Contact Us  |   Feedback   |  E-mail  |  News |  Home
JUDGMENTS
CENTRAL EXCISE
CUSTOMS
SERVICE TAX
INCOME TAX
VAT
FINANCE ACTS
FINANCE BILLS
EOU STPI
SEZ
DGFT
RBI
NTT
RESOURCES
GST


    
Email | Print

Important Links†††††††† SC††††††† HC††††††† CESTAT††††††† ITAT††††††† AAR

ITAT RULINGS 2008/Page 3

AIT-2008-307-ITAT
Avaya Global Connect Ltd. Vs. ACIT, Mumbai

Transfer of TFD to ITEL consequent to scheme of amalgamation approved by High Court cannot said to be a sale of undertaking - provisions of section 2(42C) of the Act did not apply-computation provisions fail in the present case -there can be no capital gain that could be brought to tax

AIT-2008-312-ITAT
M/s B G Chitale, Bhiiavvadi Vs Deputy CIT, Solapur
Special Bench the process of standardization and pasteurization of milk amounts to processing but does not amount to manufacture/ production for the purpose of claiming deduction under sections 80-I and 80HHA of the Act
AIT-2008-314-ITAT
M/s KLM Royal Dutch Airlines Vs DCIT, New Delhi

Recovery of rent from CSC has merely reduced its overall expenses in relation of handling of cargo by CSC and is not a separate source of income for KLM-the assessee did not derive any income other than the profits from the operation of aircrafts in international traffic and hence, in terms of Article 8, the same is not subject to tax

AIT-2008-327-ITAT
M/s. Bangalore International Airport Ltd Vs. ITO, Bangalore

Applicability of section 195(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 with regard to the amounts reimbursed by the assessee to two of its shareholders/ promoters on the various expenses incurred by them in connection with the project of International Airport at Bangalore

AIT-2008-329-ITAT
M/s. Lyka Labs Ltd. Vs Dy. CIT, Mumbai
imparting of information relating to marketing of Nitro Glycerine formulation for a period of 3 years did not amount to transfer of capital asset-the payment allocable to such business of imparting of information amounted to revenue receipt chargeable to tax. -payment relatable to non-compete covenant amounts to capital receipt not chargeable to tax
AIT-2008-335-ITAT
Sword Global (I) (P) Ltd Vs. Income Tax Officer

Section 10B-all the brought forward losses and depreciation are first required to be set off against the business profits of the current year before computing any deduction/exemption under the Act.

AIT-2008-336-ITAT
Tata Infomedia Limited Vs. ACIT, Mumbai

'Yellow pages' must be held as 'book'-assessee was engaged in the business of publication of books in terms of the provisions of section 80-Q of the Act and consequently, the assessee was entitled to deduction under the aforesaid section

AIT-2008-344-ITAT
FAG Bearings India Ltd. Vs DCIT, Baroda
assessee is not entitled to get deduction of the pre-paid lease rent for which the liability has arisen during the previous year relevant to the concerned assessment year
AIT-2008-345-ITAT
Shri Sonu Verma, Prop. M/s .Shiva Jewellers Vs ACIT, Ferozepur
jurisdiction to complete Block Assessment u/s.l58BC is not conferred on the AO by service of a warrant of authorization u/s.l32A by a competent authority but only on physical handing over the books of account/documents/assets etc. requisitioned, to Income tax Authority concerned
AIT-2008-355-ITAT
Sony India (P) Limited Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi

(a) Where more than one price is determined by the Most Appropriate Method, then Armís Length Price shall be taken to be the arithmetical mean of such price;
OR

(b) At the option of the taxpayer, a price which may vary from the arithmetical mean by an amount not exceeding 5% of such arithmetical mean

AIT-2008-360-ITAT
Kotak Securities Limited Vs ACIT, Mumbai

assessee would be entitled to claim depreciation on the WDV of the membership right of the stock exchange Mumbai.

The requirement of establishing that the debts has become bad is no longer necessary. transaction fee paid cannot be said to be a fee paid in consideration of the stock exchange rendering any technical services to the assessee. The provisions of section 194-J are therefore not attracted.

AIT-2008-361-ITAT
Philips Software Centre Private Ltd. Vs ACIT, Bangalore
AIT-2008-365-ITAT
M/s Ashok Leyland Ltd VS Deputy CIT, Chennai

The payments of reimbursement were made in the process of executing the agreement. The expenditure in question was part and parcel in the process of advice of technical character. As such the payment on account of reimbursement also attracts the provisions of section 195 of the Act

AIT-2008-370-ITAT
E-Gain Communication Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO, Pune

addition of Rs. 1,08,62,537 on account of adjustment in the Armís length price under the provisions of section 92CA(3) of the Act for services rendered by the taxpayer to its parent company in USA †is deleted

AIT-2008-376-ITAT
M/s. Star India Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT, Mumbai
whether the claim of the assessee can be denied on the ground that there is loss in the export activity if the profits from export activity are computed on standalone basis by ignoring the results of other activities
AIT-2008-379-ITAT
M/s. Daga Capital Management Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO, Mumbai

Special Bench the provisions of section 14A of the Act are applicable with respect of dividend income earned by the assessee engaged in the business of dealing with shares and securities, on the shares held as stock-in-trade when earning of such dividend income is incidental to the trading in shares

AIT-2008-382-ITAT
M/s Zaveri & Co. Exports Vs. DCIT,
Ahemedabad

Special Bench "What treatment should be given to DEPB licence benefits/receipts by the assessee while computing deductions u/s. 80HHC (3) of the I T Act?"

AIT-2008-385-ITAT
Gujarat Gas Financial Services Ltd Vs ACIT, Ahmedabad

Special Bench interest on inter corporate deposits is not an interest on loan or advance and therefore would not be includible in the chargeable interest under the Interest Tax Act. interest on interest on delayed payments would not be an interest on loan or advance and therefore would not be includible in the chargeable interest under the Interest Tax Act

AIT-2008-431-ITAT
Varia Pratik Engineering Vs ITO, Ahmedabad
section 292BB shall govern the validity of all the notices after 31.3.2008 irrespective of the fact whether the assessment year involved is 2008-09 or any subsequent year or any earlier assessment year
AIT-2008-441-ITAT
LG Cable Ltd. Vs Dy. Director of Income-Tax, Delhi
income from offshore contract taken at Rs 1,05,48,950/- was not taxable in the hands of the assessee
AIT-2008-463-ITAT
Phoenix International Ltd. Vs. DCWT, New Delhi

The loans availed by the assessee in the present case against the security of lands in question for the purpose of working capital assistance and packing credit, even though were the debts secured on the said lands, could not be considered as the debts which have been incurred in relation to the said lands as envisaged in Section 2(m) and the same, therefore, could not be deducted while computing the net wealth of the assessee.

ITAT Rulings††† Page-1Page-2


HOMEJudgmentCentral ExciseCustoms †¶ Service TaxIncome TaxVATFinance Act ¶ Finance BillsEOU STPISEZDGFT RBINTTResources

 

  Copyright © 2006 allindiantaxes.com | All rights reserved
website designing India & CMS development: Softlogics & Developments