Latest Income-Tax Details

For Full Access To All Latest Judgments on Income Tax
Click Here To Subscribe Now
Take a tour of our Income-Tax Library

The learned Commissioner of Income-tax Officer (Appeals) [hereinafter referred to as CIT(A)) and the Assessing Officer thereinafter referred to as the AO] failed to appreciate that the Appellant Company had on its own, offered Rs. 17 lakhs as disallowance u/s.14A, being Operating & Administrative Expenses and Establishment / General Expenses, which could be considered as attributable towards earning exempt dividend income. The CIT(A) has disallowed 0.5% of average investments (excluding Investments which yielded taxable income), which is unwarranted.The Appellant Company therefore prays that the additional disallowance made by the CIT(A), over and above the disallowance of Rs. 17 lakhs voluntarily offered by the Appellant Company be deleted.

Shanti Prime Publication Pvt. Ltd.

Sec. 92C of Income Tax Act, 1961—Transfer Pricing— While there are no specific powers vested in the TPO to recharacterize the transaction, even under the judge made law, such rechracterization can be done by the revenue authorities when the transactions are found to be substantially at variance with the stated form and in the case of assessee, there cannot even a suggestion to hold that this is a bogus transaction because admittedly the subscribed shares capital has indeed been allotted to the assessee, the transaction is thus accepted to be genuine in effect, thus, ALP adjustment based on hypothesis was indeed devoid of legally sustainable merits. - VOLTAS LTD. V/s ASSTT. CIT - [2020] 183 ITD 857 (ITAT-MUMBAI)