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 / NCLT & Others
  • 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
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
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
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 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
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    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

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2024 (1) TMI 151 - AT - Income Tax

        📋
        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

        Corporate guarantee fees above 0.25% arm's length price rejected; royalty valuation and VAT subsidy rulings confirmed ITAT Kolkata upheld CIT(A)'s decision on corporate guarantee fees, finding assessee's 0.30% rate exceeded the tribunal's previously established 0.25% ...
                      Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                          Corporate guarantee fees above 0.25% arm's length price rejected; royalty valuation and VAT subsidy rulings confirmed

                          ITAT Kolkata upheld CIT(A)'s decision on corporate guarantee fees, finding assessee's 0.30% rate exceeded the tribunal's previously established 0.25% arm's length price. For royalty income, ITAT confirmed WACC method applicability for brand valuation as risky intangible, rejecting revenue's challenge. Section 14A disallowance was restricted to investments yielding dividend income only. VAT subsidy was held capital receipt under industrial policy objectives. However, ITAT ruled depreciable assets sold after three years remain short-term capital gains under Section 50, taxable at normal rates. Dividend distribution tax under Section 115O applies regardless of recipient residency. Lease premium deduction was allowed following Balmer Lawrie precedent.




                          Issues Involved:
                          1. Deletion of adjustment towards corporate guarantee and royalty income.
                          2. Disallowance under Section 14A.
                          3. Classification of VAT subsidy as capital receipt.
                          4. Taxation rate on short-term capital gains from the sale of depreciable assets.
                          5. Deduction claims in the cross-objection.

                          Summary:

                          1. Deletion of Adjustment towards Corporate Guarantee and Royalty Income:
                          The Tribunal addressed the revenue's appeal against the deletion of adjustments made by the Assessing Officer/TPO regarding corporate guarantee fees and royalty income. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, noting that the corporate guarantee fee of 0.30% charged by the assessee was consistent with previous years and higher than the 0.25% deemed reasonable by the Tribunal in earlier cases. For royalty income, the Tribunal found that the assessee's use of the Weighted Average Cost of Capital (WACC) method to determine the Arm's Length Price (ALP) was appropriate. The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's argument that the cost of equity should be used instead, affirming that the royalty income declared by the assessee was higher than the ALP computed using WACC.

                          2. Disallowance under Section 14A:
                          The Tribunal considered the revenue's challenge to the CIT(A)'s direction to re-compute the disallowance under Section 14A by applying 0.5% only to the average investment that yielded exempt income. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, which was based on the judgment of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of M/s. Ashika Global Securities Ltd.

                          3. Classification of VAT Subsidy as Capital Receipt:
                          The Tribunal evaluated whether the VAT subsidy received by the assessee should be treated as a capital receipt or revenue receipt. The CIT(A) had classified it as a capital receipt, relying on judicial precedents, including the Supreme Court judgment in CIT v/s. Chaphalkar Brothers Pune. The Tribunal agreed with the CIT(A), noting that the subsidy was intended to encourage industrialization and generate employment, thus qualifying as a capital receipt.

                          4. Taxation Rate on Short-Term Capital Gains from the Sale of Depreciable Assets:
                          The Tribunal addressed whether the gains from the sale of depreciable assets held for more than three years should be taxed at concessional rates under Section 112. The Tribunal concluded that, according to Section 50, such gains are deemed short-term capital gains and should be taxed at normal rates, not the concessional rates applicable to long-term capital gains.

                          5. Deduction Claims in the Cross-Objection:
                          - Education Cess: The assessee's claim for deduction of education cess was dismissed as not pressed.
                          - Dividend Distribution Tax (DDT): The Tribunal held that the DDT should be taxed as per Section 115-O, irrespective of the DTAA rates.
                          - Amortization of Lease Premium: The Tribunal allowed the assessee's claim for deduction of lease premium, following the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court's decision in Balmer Lawrie & Co. Ltd Vs CIT.

                          Conclusion:
                          The Tribunal partly allowed the revenue's appeal for statistical purposes and partly allowed the assessee's cross-objection. The order was pronounced on 27th October 2023 in Kolkata.
                          Full Summary is available for active users!
                          Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                          Topics

                          ActsIncome Tax
                          No Records Found