Rental Income

Recent Case Laws - February 25, 2009

Income Tax - MAYAWATI Versus CIT, DELHI (CENTRAL-I) and ORS. [2009 -
TMI - 32451 - DELHI HIGH COURT]
Date of Decision: February 13, 2009
Petitioner prays are for quashing the notice issued u/s 148 & 142
(1) – service of notice – receipt of notice - notice was duly
addressed and stamped - notice was not barred by limitation and
retained its legal efficacy - Petitioner has failed to disclose any
grounds justifying the exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction vested
in this Court by virtue of Article 226 of the Constitution of India –
therefore, petition is dismissed

Income Tax - VIJAY JAIN Versus C.I.T [2009 - TMI - 32450 - DELHI
HIGH COURT]
Date of Decision: February 16, 2009
Addition made on account of undisclosed rental income - whether the
Tribunal was justified in law in sustaining addition to the extent
of Rs.36,918/- out of the total addition by holding that 1/11th of
the total rental income is assessable in the hands of the appellant
despite the fact the appellant was not owning any property – held
that ITAT correctly applied the law

Service Tax - GOA TOURISM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. Versus CC &
CE, GOA [2009 - TMI - 32449 - CESTAT, MUMBAI]
Date of Decision: November 11, 2008
Appeal – memo of appeal without verification part filed with the
Superintendent was within time – subsequently appeal filed with Comm.
(A) after expiry of time limit, should be treated as filed on the
date it was submitted to Supdt. – hence there was no delay in
preferring appeal - Commissioner will have to deal with that appeal
on merits, of course, subject to Section 35F of CEA - appeal is
allowed by way of remand – since delay is satisfactorily explained,
condonation of delay is granted

Service Tax - MSPL LTD. Versus CCE, BELGAUM [2009 - TMI - 32448 -
CESTAT, BANGALORE]
Date of Decision: September 25, 2008
Appellants transport the goods in their own vehicle to the buyer -
revenue proceeded on the ground that they are providing GTA
services - Therefore, they are liable to discharge the service tax
on the freight charges collected – in the present case, the buyer is
a person who actually pays the freight. It is very clear in terms of
Rule 2 (1) (d) (v) that the liability to pay service tax is cast on
the person who pays the freight - therefore, the appellant has no
liability to pay the service tax

Service Tax - HILLS & BLUES Versus DCST, DIVISION-II BANGALORE
[2009 - TMI - 32447 - CESTAT, BANGALORE]
Date of Decision: November 11, 2008
Penalty - appellant are engaged in the service of Tour Operators -
they have been availing 90% abatement in terms of Notification Nos.
39/97-ST and 1/2006-ST - appellant had wrongly availed 90% abatement
for paying service tax in respect of the service rendered as `Rent a
Cab Operator' - the fact that the service tax had been paid
immediately after lapse was pointed out is not in dispute –
therefore, penalty u/s 78 is set aside - however, the penalty
imposed u/s 77 is upheld

Income Tax - Commissioner Of Income-Tax. Versus Alfa Laval (India)
Limited. [2009 - TMI - 32446 - SUPREME Court ]
Date of Decision: November 1, 2007
Valuation of obsolete items as certified by the auditors can not be
rejected on the ground that list of obsolete items was not produced
by the assessee - "written back" and "written off" of depreciation
are two different terms therefore adjustment made by assessee under
circular with regard to deprecation and working out of relief u/s
32AB can not be denied - Interest from customers and sales tax set
off are eligible for deduction u/ s 80 HHC