Sec. 37(1) – Where AO disallowed claim of warranty provisions and concluded that method followed to create provision was not scientific, however, assessee filed a statement showing provisions made for AY 2007-08 to 2016-17 according to which assessee had utilised about 95.5 per cent of total provisions made between these assessment years, estimate made by assessee was robust and therefore, order passed by AO was unsustainable in law.
Apple India (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT – [2023] 152 taxmann.com 102 (Karnataka).
Forfeiture of advance money due to buyer’s non-performance is a non-taxable capital receipt u/s 51.
ACIT v. Ahmad Ansari Imtiyaz – [2023] 152 taxmann.com 36 (Delhi – Trib.).
NRI’s with inactive PAN are requested to intimate their residential status to AO: CBDT
News dated 18-7-2023.
CBDT amends notification exempting non-residents (and a foreign company) from ITR filing incorporating amended definition of ‘Investment Fund’.
Notification No. 49/2023, dated 14-7-2023.
Sec. 276B – Offence and Prosecution – Failure to pay tax on distributed profits of domestic companies/tax deducted at source – When petitioner was not an employee of the company but an independent financial advisor, he could not be summoned for offence u/s 276B read with sec. 278B and thus, order taking cognizance against him deserved to be quashed.
S.M.Jain @ Shetan Mal Jain v. State of Jharkhand – [2023] 151 taxmann.com 515 (Jharkhand).
Sec. 170 – Revised return after amalgamation – Where transferor company merged with petitioner-transferee company as per approved scheme of amalgamation by NCLT and revised return could not be filed before due date by petitioner as circumstances were beyond control of petitioner, department was to be directed to take into account revised return of income filed for assessment year in question.
TSI Business Parks Hyderabad (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT – [2023] 151 taxmann.com 514 (Telangana).