| Saturday, May 14, 2011 |
|
1. ICICI BANK LTD Vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ITA No. 11/ Lkw /2011, Assessment Year : 2009-2010, Dated: March 23, 2011 Section 201, 201(1A) - Whether payment made by cheque is deemed to have been made on the date of delivery of cheque and not on the date of encashment. In the present case, it is noticed that the certificate issued by the Union Bank of India, Chandganj, Lucknow dated 10/02/2010 clearly mentioned that the assessee deposited income-tax amounting to Rs.2,15,73,701/- vide pay order No. 831222 dated 04/07/2008 which was credited in the account of the bank on 07/07/2008 through bankers clearing house so it is clear that the amount was collected by the authorized bank on behalf of the income tax authorities on 07/07/2008 so there was no default as far as the assessee is concerned. In this regard the CBDT has issued a Circular No. 261 dated 8th August 79 stating therein that in terms of rule 80 of the Compilation of the Treasury Rules, if a cheque or draft is tendered in payment of Government dues and accepted under the provisions of rule 79 (ibid) is honored on presentation the payment is deemed to have been made on the date on which it was handed over to the Government bankers. (Please click here for judgment)
2. ITO VS. M/S ONS CREATIONS PVT. LTD., I.T.A. NO. 3981/DEL/2010, A.Y. : 2006-07, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL – DELHI, DATE OF ORDER : 13/05/2011 No liability to TDS in respect of freight charges (outward) paid on behalf of clients to C&F agents, which amounts were later on reimbursed by the clients. As such no disallowance of the same could be made u/s 40(a)(ia) (Please click here for judgment)
3. DCIT Vs MARUTI COUNTRYWIDE AUTO FINANCIAL SERVICES PVT LTD, ITA No. 2181 to 2183/ Del/ 2010, Assessment Years : 2002-03, 2005-06 & 2006-07, Dated : April 29, 2011 Whether expenses on account of loss on sale of repossessed assets is allowable as revenue expenditure - Whether provisions of the RBI Act override the provision of Income-tax Act for the purpose of claiming deduction under the Income Tax Act. The disallowance towards interest has been made by the AO only on the ground that the provisions of Income-tax Act could not be override by the provisions of the RBI Act. However, according to the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Vasisth Chay Vyapar Ltd., Section 45Q of RBI Act will override the provisions of the Income-tax Act, therefore, the very basis of the disallowance made by the AO is not in accordance with the aforementioned decision of Delhi High Court. Therefore, there is no infirmity in the order of the CIT (A) vide which the disallowance has been deleted. (Please click here for judgment)
What's New
"Age is only a number, a cipher for the records.
Thanks for your valuable time
"Voice of CA"
|
| « Back |
New User? 
Subscribe Now