1. VOLUME NO.: LLAT/727 OF 2016-17 DATE: 16 April 2014
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Dear Client,
We have pleasure in listing below some of the recent legal landmarks.
SrNo Authority Section/Rules RATIO(S)
Citation /Subject CASE(NAME OF ASSESSEE)
1.1 BANG ITAT 92C ITA
Where comparable company was selected as comparable on basis of information
obtained under section 133(6) non-furnishing of such information to A would vitiate
selection of that company.
1.2 42TM333 Transfer Pricing
3DPLM Software Solutions Ltd
2.1 GWH HC 158BB 158BD 158B(b) ITA
Since A declared certain income in belated return filed under section 139(4) after
date of search therefore to the extent said income was covered by advance tax and
TDS same could not be treated as undisclosed income.
2.2 60TM169 Search Assessment
3R
3.1 BOM HC 9(1)(vii) ITA
Sum paid by Indian entities for utilizing automated telecommunications system is not
assessable as fees for technical services as there is no profit element in it.
3.2 ITA No 1306_2013 Deemed income
A. P. Moller Maersk A/S
4.1 DEL HC 147 148 ITA
Since AO did not file appeal against order of TRIB and still AO had time to file an
appeal reassessment proceedings could not be sustained till filing of an appeal.
4.2 63TM200 Reassessment
A. T. Kearney India Ltd.
5.1 AP&T HC 143 ITA
Taxing two assessees for same premises and for same period was not justified.
5.2 63TM036 Assessment
A. Venkateswara Rao
6.1 GUJ HC 69B ITA
Addition under section 69B was correctly made by AO since in course of survey A
admitted that he was unable to explain unaccounted stock.
6.2 40TM245 Unexplained expenditure
Razakbhai R. Arabiani
