“Section 134(1)”
The decision most relied on for Section 134(1) is Woolcombers of India Ltd. v. CIT (134 ITR 219), cited in 129 judgments on BharatTax.
Leading authorities on Section 134(1)
Where an assessee's own funds or interest-free funds exceed the interest-free advances or investments made, no disallowance of interest expenditure can be made, including under Section 14A.
No addition to income can be made based solely on documents found from a third party without examining that third party and establishing a clear link between the documents' contents and the assessee.
The Supreme Court considered the delay in filing an appeal and the appellant's justification for it. The court noted that the appellant's registered address was used for communication and that the postal authorities returned mail. The court referenced its earlier decision in 'Meda Raja Kishor Raghuramy Reddy Vs ACIT' when considering the appellant's case.
When determining income from house property under Section 23, the Annual Letable Value (ALV) can be estimated by deeming 7% of the property's value as notional rent, particularly when actual rent or other clear basis for ALV is absent.
A society registered under the Karnataka Souharda Sahakari Act, 1997, qualifies as a co-operative society under Section 2(19) and is eligible for deductions under Section 80P.
An issue already concluded by the jurisdictional High Court is not debatable and cannot be rectified under section 154.
Payments made by a resident Indian to foreign attorneys for services rendered outside India are not taxable in India as fees for technical services (FTS) if the income of the foreign attorneys is outside India.
An Assessing Officer's decision allowing a claim based on the assessee's detailed written explanation and inquiries made during assessment cannot be deemed erroneous simply because the order lacks elaborate discussion on the matter.