-
The assessee has submitted that this was an inadvertent mistake on the part of the Accountant of the assessee which has not been accepted by the authorities below. When in respect of sale of property, matter was referred to DVO to determine sale consideration at a higher amount, that by itself would not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars of income so as to levy penalty under Section 271(1)(c)
SHAHEEN M. MUJAWAR PRABHATWADI KURLA PIPELINE VERSUS ITO-26 (3) (2) , MUMBAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22374 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82855&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Since the issue has been decided by the ITAT in earlier year in assessee's favour the disallowance of depreciation by the AO for this year is not sustainable as the same is consequential to the depreciation allowed and WDV of assets in earlier year. Therefore, following the order of the Coordinate Bench in assessee’s own case for AY 2009-10 I wherein held assessee is entitled to depreciation on the enhanced cost at which the assessee has taken over the assets and direct the AO to allow the depreciation as claimed by the assessee.
M/S DHARMANDAN DIAMONDS PVT. LTD. VERSUS ADDL. C.I.T. -5 (1) , MUMBAI.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22372 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82860&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
In the show cause notice, the AO has fairly mentioned to show cause and to appear within 7 days as to why a penalty u/s 271B should not be levied. AO also mentioned about the opportunity of hearing in person or through authorised representative. The assessee failed to substantiate and furnish plausible explanation, the explanation furnished by the assessee was not found to be plausible. No reasonable cause for not levying penalty was disclosed to the AO. AO levied minimum penalty prescribed u/s 271B.
M/S YASH REALTORS C/O G.P. MEHTA AND CO VERSUS THE DY. CIT-30 (3) , MUMBAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22368 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82833&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
CIT(A) has nowhere examined the relevant facts qua assessee’s alleged undisclosed income as to whether the same represented any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing or any entry in the books of account or other document in the light of the foregoing explanation. We also notice that their lordships judgment in Sudarshan Silk Mills does not deal with the impugned statutory provision but involved sec.271(1)(c) penalty proceedings only.
DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 (1) , KOLKATA VERSUS SHRI GOPAL KRISHAN AGARWAL
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22367 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82836&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Considering the salient feature of the diamond industry, we are in agreement with Ld. CIT(A) that the margin derived by the diamond manufacturers are between 1.5% to 4.5% and in trading profits are in the range 1 to 3%. When the AO has not doubted the sales declared by the assessee and merely rejecting the purchases is not proper. Assessee must have taken advantage by taking accommodation entries. Therefore, we are inclined to accept the finding of Ld. CIT(A).
ACIT- 22 (3) , MUMBAI VERSUS SUJAL H. SHAH (HUF)
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22366 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82837&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
While ascertaining whether the companies are persistent loss making or not, the quantum of loss suffered during the period under consideration is immaterial. The Tribunal in various decisions have only considered the period of loss and not the quantum of loss.
DCIT-8 (3) , MUMBAI VERSUS M/S. SMARTSTREAM TECHNOLOGIES INDIA PVT. LTD. AND (VICE-VERSA)
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22356 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · DCIT-8 (3) , MUMBAI VERSUS M/S. SMARTSTREAM TECHNOLOGIES INDIA PVT. LTD.
-
In the revised return of income, there is no concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars of income of any kind. Disallowance of claim u/s 54 of the I.T. Act, nowhere attract the penalty in view of the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Reliance Petroproduct Vs. CIT (P) Ltd. Taking into account all the facts and circumstances, we are of the view that the finding of the CIT(A) is not justifiable, therefore, we set aside the same and delete the penalty.
LATE SHASHIRAJ KAPOOR (THROUGH LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE KUNAL KAPOOR) VERSUS ACIT CIRCLE 16 (1) , MUMBAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22353 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82763&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Without any specific enquiry on the subject by the assessing officer, the assessee has tried to pass off the information about how the said long term capital loss to be carried forward arose under a misleading heading of note on allowability of provision written back.
STANDARD INDUSTRIES LTD. VERSUS PCIT-3, MUMBAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22352 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82767&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
In the present case, the business of the assessee is manufacturing of plastic packing material. Thus, prima facie, it appears that the assessee is not engaged in the business of warehousing. However, it is the contention of the assessee from the assessment stage itself that in the event the customer does not lift the goods within the permissible time limit, warehousing charges is levied for storage of goods in the warehouse.
RITESH AGARWAL VERSUS ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE–17 (3) , MUMBAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22350 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82769&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
At the time of hearing before the CIT(A), the assessee furnished the PAN Card of the share applicants, income tax acknowledgment for the A.Y. 2012-13, annual accounts of share applicant for A.Y. 2012-13, bank statements for AY 2012-13 depicting the payments made by the share applicants through banking channel, ROC records of the share applicant for AY2012-13 & Memorandum of Association and Articles.
JCIT (OSD) -9 (3) (1) , MUMBAI VERSUS M/S. DILIP PAJWANI DEVELOPERS
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22346 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82737&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
CIT(A) affirmed the action of AO holding that disallowance of 12.5% in the business of wholesale trading of electronic items such as computer parties, accessorises, print cartridges and Sony tapes are rational and justified. We have noted that before us the assessee has not filed even a single document to substantiate his contention.
TEJASH SURESH SHAH VERSUS ITO-26 (3) (5) MUMBAI.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22328 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82620&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the ITAT decision for the A.Y. 2012-13. Provisions of section 45(3) is not a specific provision overrides the other provisions of the Act, importing a deeming fiction provided in section 50C of the Act cannot be extended to another deeming fiction created by the statute by way of section 45(3) to deal with special cases of transfer.
ASST. CIT, RANGE - 9 (1) (1) , MUMBAI VERSUS M/S. AMARTARA PVT. LTD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22327 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82622&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The assessee has taken housing loan of ₹ 2,25,00,000/- from Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd., on 28.01.2011 and said loan has been directly paid to Hiranandani constructions Pvt Ltd. Since the installment paid for purchase of flat is in excess of amount needs to be paid, in the schedule of payments the developer has paid interest of ₹ 13,62,658/- calculated @ 12% on excess money received before the due date of payment from the assessee.
BIPIN BHUPENDRA MODY VERSUS ACIT, CIRCLE – 18 (1), MUMBAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22310 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82543&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
AS-14, nowhere prescribed for different method of computation of net worth of undertaking acquired by way of slump sale for different purposes. In this case, the assessee although, followed AS-14 for accounting of acquisition of business, while arriving at goodwill, it has revalued its assets, which is different from value of assets, as per books of accounts of erstwhile proprietorship firm. When it comes to payment of capital gain on slump sale, the proprietor of erstwhile firm has taken net worth as per books of accounts of firm as on the date of acquisition.
ABHISHRI PACKAGING PVT. LTD. VERSUS DCIT-9 (1) (1) MUMBAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22309 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82547&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Revenue authority are not to put on blinkers and ignore the overwhelming surrounding circumstances. CIT(A)’s reliance upon the case laws and the circular is totally not applicable on the facts of the present case. The facts of the case prima facie indicate that assessee has received sums abroad from foreign concern on account of services rendered in India. In these circumstances it was incumbent upon the assessee to cogently rebut that assessee has not received any sums abroad for services rendered in India which could have been transferred from abroad in his Indian account through these concerns.
DCIT (IT) -4 (1) (2) MUMBAI VERSUS SHRI ARUN MADHVACHARI RANGACHARI C/O. DAR MEDIA PVT. LTD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22307 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82523&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
On a perusal of the lease and license agreement it is seen that burden of paying the property tax is on the licensor. As per the mutual agreement between the parties, the licensee agreed to reimburse the property tax to the licensor save and except any late fee / charge for any statutory dues. Thus, as could be seen from the aforesaid terms of the agreement, the reimbursement of property tax by the assessee to the licensor is purely contractual and not a statutory liability.
AREVA INDIA PVT. LTD. VERSUS ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE–14 (1) (1), MUMBAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22305 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82526&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
It is only after recording of such satisfaction that the A.O can take recourse to the provisions of Sec.14A(2) and (3) r.w Rule 8D of the Rules. Although, we are in agreement with the claim of the ld. A.R that in the absence of recording of the requisite satisfaction as regards the correctness of an assesse’s claim of disallowance under Sec.14A, the A.O is divested of his jurisdiction to dislodge the suo-moto disallowance made by the assessee under Sec. 14A of the Act, but then, we find that there is no such infraction of the said statutory requirement by the A.O in the case before us.
KJMC CORPORATE ADVISORS (INDIA) PVT. LTD VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER, CIRCLE-3 (2) (3), MUMBAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22304 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82512&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
In the present case, assessee has taken permanent membership of CCI Club and assessee is allowed to use the facility of the club and it can never create any capital assets. As the assessee can only utilize the facility and in case, he decides to surrender the membership, he will not get any refund. Therefore, assessee does not get any right by becoming a member.
SHAILENDER MAYANK HEMCHAND VERSUS ACIT-19 (3), MUMBAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22302 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82497&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Income for the year under consideration of ₹ 447.30 crore and further ₹ 17.89 crore was accrued to the assessee. The assessee offered the same under the head Capital Gain and no other income which is not accrued to the assessee is not liable to tax in the year under consideration. The remaining income was accrued only in subsequent Assessment Year i.e. A.Y. 2013-14 to 2016-17 that is an amount of ₹ 17.89 Crore each in four subsequent years, and the same has been offered for taxation under the head Capital Gain. Even this fact is not disputed by the revenue.
UNIVERSAL MEDICARE PVT. LTD. VERSUS DCIT, CENTRAL CRICLE-3 (2) , MUMBAI AND (VICE-VERSA)
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22299 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82505&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
After careful reading of section 115BBD, we agree with the submission of Ld. AR that there is no provision in that section to eliminate the dividend income from specified foreign company before setting off of loss and similar to the provisions and specific direction present in section 115BBE.
TATA MOTORS LTD. VERSUS DCIT LTU-2, MUMBAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22298 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82506&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.