Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 14 (0.41 seconds)Engineering Analysis Centre Of ... vs The Commissioner Of Income Tax on 2 March, 2021
22. Respectfully following the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in
Beacon Projects (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT (supra), we hold that the amount of Rs.9,27,000/-
paid by the assessee to Dipps Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. for surrender of rights which
has been treated as compensation cannot be treated as interest and therefore, the
assessee has no TDS obligation and therefore, section 40(a)(ia) of the Act cannot
be applied. We, therefore, set aside the order of the CIT(A) / NFAC and direct the
12
ITA No.704/PUN/2024
Assessing Officer to delete the addition. The second issue raised by the assessee is
accordingly allowed.
Section 194A in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Chartered Accountants Act, 1949
Section 23 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
The Land Acquisition Act, 1894
Acit, New Delhi vs M/S Ashutosh Developers Pvt. Ltd.,, New ... on 27 April, 2020
In the case of Sheth Developers P Ltd. Vs
DCIT, the Hon'ble ITAT vide appeal No ITA No. 1953/Mum/2020 did 27.6.2022
held that the provisions of sec.23(5) of the Act had been introduced in the statute
for taxability of notional rent in respect of properties held as stock in trade has
been introduced only from A.Y. 2018-19 onwards. Hence the said provisions
cannot be made applicable upto A.Y. 2017-18. Relief on the decision of the
Hon'ble Tribunal, the AO is directed to delete the addition made in respect of
deemed rent. Hence, the ground No.4 to 9 of the appeal are allowed."
The Finance Act, 2017
Polestar Electronic(P) Ltd vs Addl. Commissioner, Sales Tax Delhi on 20 February, 1978
8. While understanding the scope of this provision, it is important to
remember the principle laid down by the Apex Court in Polestar Electronic (Pvt.)
Ltd. v. Addl. CST [(1978) 41 STC 409] that 'if there is one principle of
interpretation more well settled than any other, it is that statutory enactment must
ordinarily be construed according to the plain natural meaning of its language
and that no words should be added, altered or modified unless it is plainly
necessary to do so in order to prevent a provision from being unintelligible,
absurd, unreasonable, unworkable or totally irreconcilable with the rest of the
10
ITA No.704/PUN/2024
statute' is to be considered. If this is the principle to be borne in mind, the term
'interest' as defined in section 2(28A) of the Act has to be construed strictly. On
such literal construction, it can be seen that before any amount paid is construed
as interest, what is required to be established is that the sum paid is in respect of
any money borrowed or debt incurred and that there is debtor-creditor
relationship between the parties. These are the necessary ingredients of section 2
(28A).
Bikram Singh & Ors vs The Land Acquisition Collector & Ors on 11 September, 1996
11. From the principles laid down in the decisions referred to above, it is
obvious that section 2(28A) is not attracted to every payment made and that the
11
ITA No.704/PUN/2024
provision can be attracted only in cases where there is debtor-creditor
relationship and that payments are made in discharge of a pre-existing obligation.