Where the Assessing Officer of the searched person and the other person is the same, the limitation for completing assessment under Section 153C is to be computed from the date of transfer of jurisdiction under Section 127, and any assessment made beyond the prescribed period is liable to be quashed as barred by limitation.

Direct Tax/ Income Tax 0
0
ITAT, Delhi: Sudhir Aggarwal v. DCIT, Central Circle-28 New Delhi Background: A search under Section 132 was conducted on the Alankit Group on 18.10.2019, pursuant to which proceedings under Section 153C were initiated against the assessee on the basis of seized material alleged to pertain to him. The assessee’s case was transferred to the …
Continue  →

Whether a foreign shipping enterprise operating round-trip cruise services with hospitality and entertainment facilities is engaged in the business of carriage of passengers so as to be entitled to presumptive taxation under Section 44B of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Direct Tax/ Income Tax 0
23
Supreme Court: Director of Income Tax (IT)-I v. Superstar Libra Ltd. BACKGROUND The assessee, acting as an agent of Superstar Libra Ltd. (SLL), a non-resident shipping company, sought a certificate under Section 195 by claiming that the income of SLL was taxable under Section 44B at the presumptive rate of 7.5% of the gross …
Continue  →

Section 115BB: ITAT Bangalore holds only net winnings from online gaming are taxable

Direct Tax/ Income Tax 0
37
ITAT Bangalore: Arakere Channappa Vishwanath v. ITO The Tribunal allowed the assessee’s appeal, holding that the Assessing Officer erred in taxing the entire gross gaming receipts of Rs 2.33 crore under Section 115BB. The assessment was initiated on the basis of information received from the Compliance Risk Information Unit and details furnished by Gameskraft …
Continue  →

Section 56(2)(ix): Karnataka High Court holds that business advances for procurement of stock-in-trade cannot be taxed as forfeited advances

Direct Tax/ Income Tax 0
34
Karnataka High Court: Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Koramangala, Bangalore & Anr. v. Shri Ravi Shankar Shetty The Court dismissed the Revenue’s appeal, holding that Section 56(2)(ix) was inapplicable where the advances were received for procuring land as stock-in-trade and there was no forfeiture of such advances. The assessee, engaged in the business of …
Continue  →