Delhi ITAT deletes
protective addition of Rs.371.34cr in respect of income of overseas companies
made in the hands of shareholder assessee (individual) while conducting search
and seizure operation u/s 132(1) for AYs 2006-07 to 2012-13; Notes that Revenue
had made addition in the hands of 3 persons – 1) overseas companies (on
substantive basis) 2) assessee’s husband (on protective basis on the grounds
that he exercised control and management of the affairs of the overseas
companies) 3) assessee (on protective basis on the ground that even though
profits of all the overseas companies were taxable in India being ‘Resident’
u/s 6(3), they did not admit to be in jurisdiction of India and hence no valid
return was filed by them); ITAT opines that “when addition was already made in
the hands of the overseas companies on substantive basis treating them as
residents in India, there is no justification for the Assessing Officer to make
such an addition in the hands of a share holder on protective basis, when no
benefit was derived by her from these companies to protect the interest of
revenue”; Further, noting that based on the assessment of assessee’s husband,
Revenue made addition of similar amount in case of assessee, ITAT opines that
“the Assessing Officer did not assess the income of the assessee based on the
details filed in her return u/s 153A, but assessed the income of the overseas
companies in her hands without any basis”; Observing that CIT(A) had deleted
entire protective addition in assessee’s husband’s case, ITAT states that the
same would apply mutatis mutandis to assessee’s case and thus deletes the
addition as ‘unwarranted and unjustified’:ITAT
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Bombay High Court Clarifies Tax Exemption Eligibility for Venture Capital Funds
In a significant ruling, the Bombay High Court has reaffirmed that a Venture Capital Fund (VCF) registered with SEBI is entitled to claim ...
-
Slump sale is transfer of one or more business undertakings for a lump sum consideration, without assigning individual values to the each...
-
A new website launched for TDS related matters www.tdscpc.gov.in TRACES – T DS R econciliation A nalysis and C orrection E nabling S yste...
-
Facts Centrica India Offshore Private Limited (CIO), an Indian Company, is a wholly owned subsidiary of Centrica Plc, UK Centrica Plc a...
-
The Tax Audit season has started and it’s the time when the Assessees rush to their Chartered Accountants (CA) to get their Tax Audit d...
-
SREI Infrastructure Finance Ltd vs. ITSC (Delhi High Court) The assessee entered into a scheme of arrangement u/s 391-394 of the Compani...
-
Facts The taxpayer, a partnership firm, derived income from the business of handling and transport of ship containers, customs clearing a...
-
M/s. Alpha Projects Society P. Ltd vs. DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad) In AY 2005-06, the assessee made payments to contractors & for professi...
-
01. TDS u/s 194J is required to be done for Royalty also w.e.f 13-7-2006. 02. Royalty had been defined under explanation 2 of se...
-
F.No.354/66/2011-TRU Government of India Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Central Board of Excise & Customs...
-
M/s. Merilyn Shipping & Transports vs. ACIT (ITAT Visakhapatnam Special Bench) The assessee incurred brokerage expenses of Rs.38....
No comments:
Post a Comment