Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Tribunal ruling on expenditure, TDS, sponsorship, and income recognition</h1> <h3>M/s Libra Techcon Ltd Versus Dy. CIT-1 (2), Mumbai And Vice-Versa</h3> M/s Libra Techcon Ltd Versus Dy. CIT-1 (2), Mumbai And Vice-Versa - TMI Issues Involved:1. Disallowance of expenditure incurred in relation to exempt income under Section 14A.2. Disallowance of expenses under Section 40(a)(ia) for failure to deduct TDS.3. Disallowance of sponsorship expenses paid to non-residents under Section 40(a)(i).4. Disallowance of site services and project commission under Section 40(a)(i).5. Estimation of income on advances received from projects.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Disallowance of Expenditure Incurred in Relation to Exempt Income (Section 14A):The assessee received dividend income of Rs. 1,26,05,919, which was claimed exempt under Section 10(34). The AO determined disallowance of expenditure incurred in relation to exempt income towards interest expenses and other expenses by invoking Rule 8D(2)(ii) & 8D(2)(iii) of I.T. Rules, 1962. The assessee contended that no expenditure was incurred to earn the exempt income and accepted an ad-hoc disallowance of Rs. 50,000. The CIT(A) provided partial relief but confirmed the addition for other expenses. The Tribunal concluded that 5% of exempt income as expenditure would be justified, directing the AO to make an addition of 5% of exempt income towards expenditure incurred in relation to earning exempt income.2. Disallowance of Expenses under Section 40(a)(ia) for Failure to Deduct TDS:The AO disallowed Rs. 5,20,67,912 towards liaisoning and site services and project commission, citing failure to deduct TDS under Section 195. The assessee argued that the payments were made outside India for services rendered outside India, thus Section 195 was not applicable. The CIT(A) directed an ad-hoc disallowance of 25% for liaisoning charges. The Tribunal found that the payments were made to non-resident companies with no PE in India for services rendered outside India, thus Section 195 was not applicable. The Tribunal reversed the CIT(A)'s ad-hoc disallowance of 25% and directed the AO to delete the addition under Section 40(a)(ia).3. Disallowance of Sponsorship Expenses Paid to Non-Residents under Section 40(a)(i):The CIT(A) directed the AO to make an ad-hoc disallowance of 25% for sponsorship expenses paid to non-residents, which amounted to Rs. 1,29,19,935, and deleted the balance disallowance of Rs. 3,91,48,377. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, noting that the payments were made to non-residents with no PE in India for services rendered outside India, making Section 195 inapplicable.4. Disallowance of Site Services and Project Commission under Section 40(a)(i):The AO disallowed site services and project commission expenses for failure to deduct TDS under Section 195. The CIT(A) provided partial relief, confirming the addition of Rs. 63,15,200 paid to Saudi Designer Engineering Constructions for failure to deduct TDS under Section 194J. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, noting that the payments were made to non-residents with no PE in India for services rendered outside India, making Section 195 inapplicable.5. Estimation of Income on Advances Received from Projects:The AO added Rs. 10,84,97,194 as income accrued from advances received, arguing that the assessee did not follow the percentage completion method. The assessee contended that it followed the mercantile system of accounting and recognized revenue on a proportionate completion basis, which was accepted by the department in the past. The CIT(A) deleted the addition, and the Tribunal upheld this decision, noting that the assessee consistently followed the percentage completion method in accordance with ICAI standards, and there was no change in facts or circumstances to warrant a deviation.Conclusion:The Tribunal partly allowed the assessee's appeal and dismissed the revenue's appeal, directing the AO to make the specified adjustments and deletions as per the Tribunal's findings. The order was pronounced in open court on 24th August 2018.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found