1

Income Tax - 2008 - TMI - 3923 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS

FBT - The transportation cost incurred by R & B Falcon (A) Pty Limited (hereinafter referred to as the "applicant") in providing the transportation facility for movement of offshore employees from their residence in home countries (outside India) to the place of work (rig in India) and back is liable to fringe benefit tax.

2

Income Tax - 2008 - TMI - 3922 - HIGH COURT DELHI

Assessee, owner of premises was increased the rent of premises retrospectively w.e.f. 1-4-94 by way of an agreement - appellant contended that the sum of arrears was in the nature of mesne profits and not arrears of rent and as such the same cannot brought to tax under the head "income from house property" - Comm(A) & tribunal were justified in taking it as arrears of rent - so it is assessable u/s 5(1)(a) of IT Act - no question of law arise

3

Income Tax - 2008 - TMI - 3921 - DELHI HIGH COURT

Tribunal hold that the Assesses was not entitled to accumulate income for the objects of the Charitable Trust without specifying the purposes for which the income is accumulated -in the application seeking exemption, the Assesses has specified the charitable purposes for which funds will be utilized - held that we are of the opinion that it was not required for the Assesses to be more specific with regard to the utilization of the funds - Assessee's appeal allowed

4

Income Tax - 2008 - TMI - 3920 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

Assessee debited equal amount of diminution in the value of shares in the P/L account claiming it revenue loss - since the issue whether it is a business loss or not has been decided against assessee, it cannot be concluded that the assessee had filed inaccurate particulars of income, because assessee had duly disclosed the same in the audit statements filed before AO - disclosed writing off of investments in audit statements for both the A.Y.s so, penalty u/s 271(1) (c) is not justified

5

Income Tax - 2008 - TMI - 3919 - KERELA HIGH COURT

Tribunal rejected the appeal of assessee on ground that assessee, having not objected to the orders passed by the assessing authority on a particular point before the first appellate authority and having allowed the first appellate authority to pass an order, so he could not have filed further appeals before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal - Tribunal on that sole ground itself, could have rejected the appeals - HC decline to answer the questions of law raised for consideration