INCOME TAX REPORTS (ITR)
HIGH COURTSAdvance tax --Interest--No material on record that assessee committed default in payment of advance tax--Tribunal justified in remitting matter to Assessing Officer for decision afresh--Income-tax Act, 1961, s. 234B-- CIT v . Kotak Securities Ltd . (No. 2)
(Bom) . . . 352
Business expenditure --Purchase of software--Is revenue expenditure--Income-tax Act, 1961, s. 37-- CIT v . Amway India Enterprises (Delhi) . . . 341
----Repairs--Current repairs--Is revenue expenditure--Income-tax Act, 1961, s. 37-- CIT v . Amway India Enterprises (Delhi) . . . 341
----Software expenses--Expenditure not to create new asset or a new source of income but to upgrade system--Extent of expenditure cannot be a decisive factor in determining its nature--Treatment in books of account not conclusive--Software expenditure is revenue expenditure--Income-tax Act, 1961, s. 37-- CIT v . Asahi India Safety Glass Ltd . (Delhi) . . . 329
Capital or revenue expenditur e--Software expenses--Allowable--Income-
Depreciation --First stock exchange membership card--Entitled to depreciation--Income-tax Act, 1961-- CIT v . Kotak Securites Ltd . (No. 1) (Bom) . . . 349
----First stock exchange membership card--Entitled to depreciation--Income-tax Act, 1961-- CIT v. Kotak Securities Ltd . (No. 2) (Bom) . . . 352
Reassessment --Reassessment after four years--Failure by assessee to disclose material facts--Income from other sources--Reopening of assessment to disallow interest on borrowings for purchase of shares--No failure by assessee--Reassessment not permissible--Income-tax Act, 1961, ss. 57(iii), 147, 148-- Ashank D. Desai v . Asst. CIT
(Guj) . . . 326
AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS
Non-resident --Royalty--Provision of social media monitoring service for company, brand or product, for subscribing clients--Subscriptions are royalty chargeable to tax in India--Tax deductible at source on payments--Income-tax Act, 1961, ss. 9(1)(vi), Expln. 2(iv), 195--Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between India and Singapore, art. 12-- ThoughtBuzz Pvt. Ltd., In re . . . 345
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.