-
ITAT - Siphoned off amount from the company cannot be considered as accretion to the wealth within the meaning of section 2(ea)(vi) of the Wealth Tax Act.
B.Ramalinga Raju Vs Asst. Commissioner of Wealth Tax
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27408 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
-
ITAT - Claim for set-off of interest expenditure on borrowed funds against income from investment of borrowed funds allowed.
Hinduja National Power Corporation Limited Vs DCIT
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27333 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
-
ITAT- As the subsidy received by the assessee in the form of refund of sales tax paid from the Sate Govt of AP is to be treated as revenue receipts.
JCIC (OSD), CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 (4) , HYDERABAD. VERSUS MEDHA SERVO DRIVES PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD.
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27117 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=91636&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
If there is a difference in the value of the property as determined by the assessee and the SRO value, the AO is bound to refer the matter to the DVO and the assessment should be done on the basis of DVO report.
CHANDRA LOK HOTELS LTD., HYDERABAD. VERSUS DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE – 1 (2), HYDERABAD.
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27098 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=91618&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Order of the Ld. CIT (A) to be de void of merit because he has not given a categorical finding as to why the provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act would not be attracted in the case of the assessee.
INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, KADAPA VERSUS M/S. MAYURI CONSTRUCTIONS
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 27045 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=91366&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
There is no merit in Revenue’s preceding arguments.
DY. CIT, CIRCLE 2 (2) HYDERABAD, ITO, WARD 2 (2), HYD VERSUS M/S GLOBAL ALUMINIUM PVT. LTD. SECUNDERABAD
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26920 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=90821&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Since no incriminating documents were found during the course of search u/s 153A, thus no addition can be made.
ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE – 1 (1) , HYDERABAD. VERSUS SNJ SUGARS AND ALLIED PRODUCTS LTD.
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26900 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=90735&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Being govt. employee, the assessee is not permitted to enter in chit fund.
KISHAN KOTHWAL VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 26871 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=90574&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Just because the assessee had made payments through banking channels to the vendors and recorded the diamonds purchased in its stock book does not make the transactions to be genuine with conclusive evidence.
Karni Jewellers Vs Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax
(2021) TaxCorp(LJ) 24928 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
-
Though no development activity was undertaken as confirmed by Revenue, the development agreement was not cancelled and possession of property was not handed over to assesse.
Santosh Kumar Subbani Vs Income-tax Officer
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24777 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
-
ITAT - The whole transactions are to be understood in a holistic manner and cannot be construed as a colourable device or a sham transaction as admittedly there is no element of any income within the meaning of Section 2(24) of the Act in this entire gamut of transaction.
Income Tax Officer Vs M/s. Shrilekha Business Consultancy Pvt. Ltd.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24610 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
-
The commission retained by the credit card company is therefore in the nature of normal banking charges and not in the nature of commission for acting on behalf of the merchant establishment.
Asst. Commissioner of Income – tax Vs Head Infotech India Pvt. Ltd.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 24439 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · Section 194H
-
The amount spent on renovation of such residential house by an assessee according to his requirements is allowable as exempt u/s.54F of the Act as it would amount to construction of a residential house.
Ms. Juveria Begum Vs Income Tax Officer
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 23178 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · Section 54F
-
Since income from business and income from profession falls under the same head, set off of loss from one source of income with another source of income under the same head is allowable as per the provisions of section 70 of the Act.
Vishanji Khimji Karani Vs ACIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 23046 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
-
Sale value declared by the assessee is only 46% of the SRO value of ₹ 16,54,500/-. Since the property sold by the assessee is a litigated property, I am of the considered view that the market value of the property cannot exceed the actual sale consideration received by the assessee of ₹ 7,56,250/-.
ARUNA KOMMURI, HYDERABAD VERSUS ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE – 4 (1), HYDERABAD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22999 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=84211&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
It is an undisputed fact that both assessee's father and brother own substantial areas of agricultural land. Therefore, the agricultural income disclosed by them cannot be disputed unless some facts emerged that they have not carried on agricultural activities or have suffered losses in the agricultural activities. Normally farmers do not rely on the banking channel for conducting their day to day activities and do accumulate cash balance.
LOKADRI NAIDU GEDDAM, CHITTOOR. VERSUS INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD – 2 (1) , TIRUPATI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22998 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=84215&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
It would be appropriate and just to estimate the expenditure, taking cue from Sec.44ADA.
Amitabh Verma Vs Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22974 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · Section 44ADA
-
ITAT - Sec.50C can not be invoked in case of sale of property engulfed in litigation.
Vanaja T. Nair Vs ITO
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22797 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · Section 50C
-
Genuineness of the trade payables or creditors has to be examined in the year in which they originate and that unless the liability becomes unenforceable or is written off by the assessee or is given up by the other party or something is brought on record that there is cessation of liability, the same cannot be brought to tax u/s 41(1) of the Act.
M/S. NAMA PROPERTIES LTD HYDERABAD VERSUS DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2 (1), HYDERABAD
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22686 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83635&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Having regard to the rival contentions and Rule 9B of the I.T.Rules, we find that the assessee is not claiming the expenditure incurred on the acquisition of movies but the assessee is claiming loss due to non-recovery of advances paid. Rule 9B only provides a method of computing deduction available in respect of expenditure on acquisition of distribution rights of feature films, but does not address the sequence in which deductions are to be allowed.
M/S. ASIAN THEATRES PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 13 (1) HYDERABAD
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22634 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83495&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.