1. Union Land & Building Society LTd. vs ITO (ITAT)
Dated: 24th September 2010
Whether CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action the AO in taxing the rental income and interest income as income from other sources as against business income and in not directing the Assessing Officer to allow proportionate expenses out of the total expenses incurred in earning the interest and property income. Held No

2. ITL Tours and Travels Pvt Ltd vs ITO (ITAT)
Dated: 9th September 2010

S. 40(a)(ia), 194H - Whether mere deduction of TDS and the act of not depositing the same in the Govt account warrants disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) even though the assessee is not liable to TDS - Whether discount on sale of airlines tickets allowed by the assessee is not liable to TDS u/s 194-H as there is no contract of agency at any point of time between the assessee and the intermediaries. - Appeal allowed


3. Nice Industries vs. ITO (Ahmedabad ITAT)
Dated: 17th September 2010

Without giving any finding that account books are unreliable, incorrect or incomplete, Assessing Officer cannot reject books of accounts.

No assessment under the first proviso to section 145(1) or under section 145(2) can be sustained if the Assessing Officer has not considered and recorded a finding against the assessee as to whether he has been regularly employing a method of accounting or whether his income, profits or gains can properly be deduced from his method of accounting if he has been regularly employing a method of accounting or whether the accounts are correct and complete; in the absence of these findings, the Assessing Officer cannot make assessment by invoking the provisions of Sec. 145(1) or 145(2).


4. DCIT vs M/s Astrazeneca India Pvt Ltd (ITAT)
Dated: 20th August 2010

S. 37(1) - Whether AO is right in disallowing professional charges paid by the assessee for a failed land deal entered into for expansion of business - Whether treatment of professional charges under I-T Act is to be the same for a failed deal and a consummated land deal. - Appeal dismissed.

5. DCIT, Shimoga vs M/s Shree Lakshmi Tractors (ITAT)
Dated:19th March 2010

S.40A(3), 40(a)(ia), 194H - Whether cash discount allowed by the assessee which doesn't involve payments exceeding Rs 20,000 attracts invoking provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act - Whether AO was justified in disallowing deduction u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act in respect of the advertisement expenses incurred as a part of sales expenses which involves no service element and doesn't attract the provision of TDS u/s 194H of the Act. - Appeal dismissed

Income Tax

M/s.Blackstone Asia Advisors vs Asst. DIT (Interntional Taxation)(ITAT)

Whether CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the action of the AO in not granting the benefit of indexed cost of acquisition as provided under second proviso to section 48 of the Act while computing long term capital gains/loss in respect of shares sold during the year by Foreign Institutional Investor. Held Yes


DCIT vs Kalpana J. Jayakar (ITAT)

Whether mere inclusion of land in industrial zone without any infrastructure development thereupon or without establishing and proving that land was put into use for non-agricultural purposes does not and cannot convert agricultural land into non-agricultural land.Held Yes.
Whether therefore, it could be said that land sold by assessee was an agricultural land and, as such, any gain arising from sale thereof was exempted from tax. Held Yes.

JITO Administrative Foundation Trust vs. DIT (Exemption) (ITAT)

S. 2(15) - Coaching and preparing students to appear at some specified examination upon taking specified sum would not fall within charitable purpose as specified in section 2(15).

Sri S Narasaraju vs Dy.CIT (Bangalore ITAT)

Section 144, 142(1) - Whether where the notice of section 142(1) is issued by the AO during the course of assessment proceedings there is no need for issuance of any notice of section 144(1) in the light of second proviso to section 144-Held Yes

However since the AO has not supported his estimation of income with proper documentary evidence the matter requires fresh consideration in the interest of justice.