-
ITAT - Information is not synonymous to truth - AO simply on the basis of the investigation report of DIT (Inv.) has jumped into conclusion that there is an escapement of income which is erroneous since it does not satisfy the jurisdictional fact and law for reopening as envisaged u/s. 147.
SHRI UDIT KUMAR DUGAR VERSUS INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-36 (4), KOLKATA
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19212 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=74997&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - AO had made the enquiry or verification as required in the facts of the case to ascertain the applicability of section 2(22)(e) - Revision u/s 263 not valid.
M/S. MANIPUR TEA CO. PVT. LIMITED VERSUS PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19211 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=74998&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Salary received by individual in his NRE A/c in India for services rendered in Nigeria is not taxable in India on receipt basis u/s. 5(2) despite services rendered outside India.
Deepak Kumar Todis Vs DDIT, International Taxation, Circle-1(1)
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 19125 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
-
S. 68 Bogus Share Capital: The judgement in PCIT vs. NRA Iron & Steel 103 TM.com 48 (SC) is distinguishable on facts & does not apply to a case where the assessee has discharged its onus to prove the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the share applicants by producing the PAN details, bank account statements, audited financial statements and Income Tax acknowledgments and the investors have shown the source of source & personally appeared before the AO in response to s. 131 summons
Baba Bhootnath Trade & Commerce Ltd vs. ITO
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 18031 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · Section 68
-
ITAT - Future development expense allowable to the real estate developer in respect of completed projects based on the project completion method.
M/s. Ashiana Housing Limited Vs DCIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16882 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
-
ITAT - Adhoc disallowance of 30% made by the AO out of business promotion expenses without making any enquiry whatsoever from the parties to whom the said expenses were paid by the assessee is not sustainable.
ACIT, CIRCLE - 31 KOLKATA VERSUS M/S. AB CAPITAL
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16871 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=71079&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Show cause notice issued u/s 274 does not specify the charge against the assessee as to whether it is for concealing particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income - Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) not sustained.
SEIKH BONI ISRAIL VERSUS ITO, WARD – 48 (3) KOLKATA
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16739 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=70692&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
S. 10(38) Bogus long-term capital gains from penny stocks: If the assessee has filed evidences for (a) purchase of shares, (b) payment by account payee cheque, (c) balance sheet disclosing investments, (d) demat statement (e) evidence of sale of shares through stock exchange, (e) bank statement reflecting sale receipts, (f) brokers ledger, (g) Contract Notes etc, the gains cannot be treated as bogus on human probabilities, suspicion, conjectures and surmises (All contra judgements distinguished)
Mahavir Jhanwar vs. ITO
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16652 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · Section 10(38)
-
ITAT - TDS u/s 194J is not applicable to a person who is not a qualified professional and who is an accountant writing the accounts.
NIKHIL CHANDRA MITRA VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-49 (4), KOLKATA
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16561 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=70009&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Short-fall OR excess of TDS payment - Assessee is entitled for adjustment of the excess deposit of TDS made in the earlier year against the TDS payable for the subsequent year/(s).
STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LIMITED VERSUS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), CIRCLE-4, DURGAPUR
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16554 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=69993&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Penalty u/s 271AAB(1)(a) is attracted automatically where a search and seizure operation is carried out in which the assessees have surrendered the amount u/s 132(4).
KOLKATA HOME PRODUCTS (P.) LTD., RAJ KUMAR MISRA AND OTHERS (HUF), SUSIL KUMAR MISRA, SONS (HUF), GOODWILL COMMERCIAL COMPANY PVT. LTD., MISRA CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD. VERSUS DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 (4)
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16553 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=69994&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Software development expenditure for application software is revenue in nature.
INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WD-2 (3) , KOLKATA VERSUS I.T.C. INFOTECH INDIA LTD.
(2018) TaxCorp(LJ) 16232 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=68757&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Merely because trust was engaged in some unauthorized activity does not mean that it is not entitled to claim benefit u/s 80G by treating donation as bogus.
M/S. M.K. SHAH EXPORTS LTD. VERSUS A.C.I.T, CIRCLE-4 (1) , KOLKATA
(2018) TaxCorp(LJ) 16117 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=68229&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - No penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for capital gains not disclosed by assessee on switch over of investment from one Mutual Fund scheme to another.
Kamalesh Basu Vs CIT(A)-XVI
(2018) TaxCorp(LJ) 16049 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
-
S. 68 Bogus share capital: If (a) the assessee has furnished the Name, Address, PAN no and Share Application Form to prove that the shares were allotted to the applicants and (b) the bank statement show that money was received through banking channels and there were no immediate withdrawals to suggest that the share application amounts have been returned back to these parties in cash, it means the assessee has discharged the primary onus cast upon it to prove the identity, capacity and genuineness of transactions
Sunshine Metals & Alloys vs. ITO
(2018) TaxCorp(LJ) 15931 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · Section 68
-
S. 147/ 92: The information given by DIT (Inv) can only be a basis to ignite/ trigger "reason to suspect". The AO has to carry out further examination to convert the "reason to suspect" into "reason to believe". If the AO acts on borrowed satisfaction and without application of mind, the reopening is void (All judgements considered)
Devansh Exports vs. ACIT
(2018) TaxCorp(LJ) 15930 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · Sections 92, 147
-
S. 2(47)/ 54: Though an unregistered agreement to sell does not entitle the parties to seek part performance u/s. 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, it can be a basis for a suit for specific performance in view of s. 49 of the Registration Act. Consequently, even an unregistered agreement creates a right in favour of the buyer and constitutes a "transfer" of the old property u/s 2(47) for purposes of determining whether the purchase of the new property is within one year of the date of "transfer" of the old property
Gautam Jhunjhunwala vs. ITO
(2018) TaxCorp(LJ) 15755 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · Sections 2(47), 54
-
ITAT - Exemption u/s. 54 allowed even though the agreement to sell is not registered, since the vendee can seek decree of specific performance on the basis of unregistered agreement to sell.
GAUTAM JHUNJHUNWALA VERSUS INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WD-25 (4), KOLKATA
(2018) TaxCorp(LJ) 15728 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=66804&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Where all the three conditions as required u/s. 68 were placed before the AO then the onus shifted to the AO to disprove the materials placed before him. Without doing so, the addition made is based only on conjectures and surmises. Not valid.
ITO, WARD-12 (3), KOLKATA VERSUS M/S SPLENDOUR VILLA MAKERS PVT. LTD.
(2018) TaxCorp(LJ) 15722 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=66783&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Even in case of expenditure not fully supported by the relevant supporting documentary evidence and making it unverifiable, the same cannot be entirely disallowed keeping in view the nature of the assessee’s business. It would be fair and reasonable to disallow the said expenditure to the extent of 50% for the unverifiable element involved therein.
SMT. INDU MAHESH SHAH VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-35 (2), KOLKATA
(2018) TaxCorp(LJ) 15704 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=66740&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.