-
The manner of determination of quantum of deduction as provided under s.80IA(5) has since been clarified by the CBDT Circular No.1 of 2016 dated 15.02.2016 and is devoid of controversy any more. Having regard to the wide ranging controversies, the CBDT circular has given categorical interpretation on exercise of option of choosing initial assessment year referred to sub-section (5) of Section 80IA of the Act in favour of the assessee.
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, KHEDA VERSUS M/S. CHHOTABHAI JETHABHAI PATEL AND CO.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22905 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=84070&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
There was no sharing of knowledge or know-how or any technology to the assessee during the provision of Web Hosting Services as prescribed under Article 12(4) of the DTAA.
M/s. Esm Sys Pvt. Ltd. Vs The ITO
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22904 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
-
Deduction u/s 24 (a) is not available where the assessee was a charitable trust and its income was exempted u/s 11 of the Act.
Sindhu Sewa Samaj Vs The ITO
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22839 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · Sections 14, 24(a)
-
Merit in the case made out by the assessee that various clauses of Section 92BA of the Act were not applicable in the factual matrix.
ASHISH SUBODHCHANDRA SHAH (HUF) VERSUS PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5 AHMEDABAD
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22779 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83785&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
On due analysis of record, we are of the view that the AO has unnecessarily created an artificial distinction. The assessee is not admitting other persons in the building. It is providing facility only to the students, and there are lots of rules and regulations, bye-laws for admitting students, according to their merits in education. Thus, taking into account overall facts and circumstances, we are of the view that the assessee is entitled for benefit of sections 11 and 12 of the Income Tax Act.
SHREE DESHI LOHANA VERSUS ITO (E) WARD-2 AHMEDABAD
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22775 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83792&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Assessment order passed subsequently in the name of non-existing company would be without jurisdiction and a nullity.
Intas Lifesciences Vs ACIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22770 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
-
The activity of the assessee commenced upon the acquisition of the shares of the company. Thus, the expenses incurred by the assessee as specified under the provisions of section 35D of the Act, before the commencement of the business are eligible for deduction.
Addlife Investments Pvt. Ltd. Vs The DCIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22769 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · Section 35D
-
Payment of commission was a normal trade practice in the line of business, and every business man pays commission to procure business.
SEAHORSE PHARMA P. LTD. VERSUS ITO, WARD-2 (1) (3) VADODARA.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22757 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83745&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The own fund of the assessee exceeds the amount of investment. Accordingly presumption can be drawn that the borrowed fund was not utilised for such investments. Accordingly there cannot be any disallowance of any interest expenses in view of PCIT v. Shreno Ltd. held that if the assessee can demonstrate availability of surplus interest free funds for making investment generating tax free income, disallowance under Section 14A of the Act would not be justified.
GUJARAT STATE ENERGY GENERATION LTD. VERSUS ACIT GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE, JT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD)
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22685 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83638&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
If the assessee has overvalued its closing stock of the earlier assessment year which suggests that amount of profit was increased by that amount or the loss was decreased by the same amount of that assessment year. As such the effect of the closing stock of the earlier assessment year has already been given effect in that particular year which cannot be challenged in the year under consideration. The assessee before the CIT (A) has contended that it has valued its closing stock at the market rate being lower than the cost as per the Accounting Standard 2 notified under the Companies Act, 1956.
M/S. SHYAM COTSYN INDIA LTD. VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4 (1) (3) , AHMEDABAD
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22655 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83557&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
None of the authority below has brought out anything on record on the aspects as discussed above but arrived at the conclusion that the assessee has been carrying on business of property development on the basis that the assessee has been incurring the expenditure on continuous basis for the development of the land. The contention as raised by the assessee before the authorities below that it wanted to development the impugned land for its business activities has not been challenged.
M/S ANIL DYE CHEM INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. VERSUS A.C.I.T. (OSD) RANGE-1, AHMEDABAD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22653 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83562&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The assessee has paid interest on the money borrowed from the company namely SDIPL. This fact can be established from the details such as TDS certificate issued by the assessee to the company for the deduction of TDS on the payment of interest to the company. There is also Ledger account of the assessee in the books of the company showing the amount of interest received from the assessee by the company. There remains no dispute that the assessee has incurred interest expenses on the money borrowed from the company.
MOHAN B. AGRAWAL VERSUS D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-4 (2) , AHMEDABAD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22501 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83321&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Profit on sale of land can be deduced only after subtraction of corresponding purchase costs. It is not the case of the Revisional Commissioner that purchase cost has been separately claimed. Claim made on behalf of the assessee that relevant facts towards cost associated with the acquisition were placed before the AO in the course of assessment. It would be reasonable to infer that AO has applied his mind to such aspect.
SMT. VIRBALABEN KIRITBHAI PATEL VERSUS DCIT CIRCLE - 5, BARODA
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22471 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83225&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Vehicle was put to use on 31.03.2009 and in support of its contention, assessee has submitted copies of ledger before the lower authorities and respectfully following the aforesaid judgments, we allow claim of the assessee and this ground of the assessee is allowed and we direct assessing officer to allow the claim of depreciation. Provisions of section 40(a)(ia) has two limbs one is where, inter alia, assessee has to deduct tax and the second where after deducting tax, inter alia, the assessee has to pay into Government Account.
SHRI SUBODH RAMANLAL DESAI VERSUS DCIT, CIRCLE-3 (1) , BARODA
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22410 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82973&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Trust has been given a certificate from the office of the Charity Commissioner after going through the Memorandum of Association and seeing the activities of the trust and trust is meant for deceased member of Rotary Club Family Members. As Rotary Club is carrying out charitable activities for the public at large as organizing the blood donation camp giving books to poor students and doing charity for orphanage etc.
ROTARY CLUB SOCIAL SECURITIES FUND BHAVNAGAR AYUSHYA CANCER HOSPITAL VERSUS DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTION) , AHMEDABAD
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22409 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82974&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
In a recent decision of Supreme Court in the case of Rajkumar Gulab Badgujar wherein it is held that wherein the returned income has been accepted u/s 153C and therefore, it is held that in such case, penalty cannot be imposed.
SAMTABEN R. MANGLANI, LAJWANTIBEN M. MANGLANI VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22402 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82957&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
A delay of the shortest period may be uncondonable due to unacceptable explanation, whereas in certain other cases, delay of a long period can be condoned, if the explanation is satisfactory. However, if no mala-fide can be attributed to the delay, that delay will be condonable. We find that the assessee has shifted from Surat to Banaras, therefore, the assessee has a reasonable cause for filing appeal in delay. Hence, delay is condoned.
ANURAGRAJI V. GOSWAMI, C/O. YOGESH B. SHAH VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5 (1) , SURAT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22399 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82945&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The assessee had sufficient cause for not filing the appeal in time before the ld.CIT(A). Therefore, considering the reasons as cited in the said application and also keeping in view principles laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court, we condone the delay in filing the appeal before the ld.CIT(A). No claim shall be available for any allowances or expenditure of income referred to any section 68, section 69, section 69A, section 69B, section 69C and section 69D from A.Y. 2013-14 onwards.
SHRI RAJESHKUMAR POPATBHAI GABANI, SURAT VERSUS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3 (2) (5), SURAT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22398 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82947&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Reference to reason would indicate that the AO has nowhere quantified the income escaped. Notice has been issued after an expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, but before six years. This notice could be issued within limitation if the AO has made out a case that income exceeded rupees one lakh has escaped assessment. No such finding or observation or reference has been made in the reasons extracted.
SUMER S. SANGHVI C/O. MEHTA LODHA & CO VERSUS ACIT, CIR. 5 AHMEDABAD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22376 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82850&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
On rejection of this application, it filed appeal against the assessment order instead of 154 order passed by the Assessing Officer because the scope in challenging the assessment order in appeal is far more wider than challenging the order passed under Section 154 of the Income-tax Act for rectification of any mistake.
MORE MOVER SALES PVT LTD, C/O. SHRI PINAKIN RAMANLAL SONI VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2 (1) (4), AHMEDABAD
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22361 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82824&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.