-
While interpreting Section 54F has held that provisions of Section 54F is a beneficial provision for promoting construction of residential houses and has to be construed liberally. Kerala, Delhi, Allahabad, Calcutta and Hyderabad High Courts have taken a view that usage of the property has to be considered in determining whether it is a residential property or a commercial property and Madras High Court in C.H.KESVA RAO has held that expression residence implies some sought of permanency and cannot be equated to the expression temporary stay as a lodger.
SHRI. NAVIN JOLLY C/O NAVIN ARCHITECT PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 11 (1)
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22697 (HC-KARNATKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83015&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
It is clear that the satisfaction note u/s.153C was based on certain seized documents found during the course of search and seizure action initiated in Kalra Group cases/Consortium Securities Pvt. Ltd.
ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-14, NEW DELHI. VERSUS M/S. REALTECH CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22696 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83663&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The Assessing officer has issued a show-cause as to why penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) may not be initiated in respect of such investment, however, he has not issued any show-cause for invoking provisions of section 69 of the Act or has called for any explanation of the assessee regarding the nature and source of such investment. In fact, the assessment order so passed by the Assessing officer is silent about invoking the provisions of section 69 of the Act.
THE ACIT, CIRCLE-02, ALWAR VERSUS SHRI SUDESH KUMAR GUPTA PROP. M/S SALASAR TEXTILES
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22695 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83664&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
MCX Stock exchange Ltd is a recognized stock exchange and M/s Godavari Exim Pvt Ltd was a member of MCX Stock exchange Ltd, therefore assessee`s currency derivative transactions are covered by exception clause (d) of section 43(5) of the Act, hence loss incurred by the assessee to the tune in respect of currency derivative is not speculation loss, therefore order passed by the AO u/s 143(3) dated 02.11.2016 is not erroneous.
SHETH COMMERCIAL CO VERSUS PR. CIT-14, KOLKATA
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22694 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83668&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
No disallowance of expenditure is warranted by invoking provisions of section 14A of the Act when no exempt income is received by the taxpayer during the year under consideration. Thus, on this short reasoning alone that no disallowance of expenditure incurred can be made by invoking provisions of Section 14A of the 1961 Act whence the tax-payer has not received any exempt income during the year under consideration, we dismiss the grounds raised by Revenue w.r.t. disallowances made u/s 14A of the 1961 Act and uphold decision of learned CIT(A) in deleting disallowance of expenditure.
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE-5 (1) , CHENNAI VERSUS M/S. REPCO HOME FINANCE PVT. LTD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22693 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83671&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
As decided in own case if there is any short-fall due to any difference of opinion as to the taxability of any item or the nature of payment falling under various TDS provisions, the assessee could be declared to be an assessee in default under section 201, but no disallowance could be made by invoking the provisions of section 40 (a)(ia).
ACIT, LTU-2, KOLKATA VERSUS M/S UCO BANK
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22692 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83672&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The AO by issuing penalty notice u/s. 271B has not spelt out what was the fault for which the assessee is being proceeded against for levy of penalty. Since the AO has not struck down the irrelevant portion/fault which is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the case, the notice is vague and therefore, bad in law.
NORTH EASTERN CONSTRUCTIONS VERSUS THE ITO, WARD-1 (2) , DIBRUGARH
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22691 (ITAT-GAUHATI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83674&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Assessment order did not record any satisfaction as to for which limb of Section 271 (1)(c) of the I.T. Act the penalty proceedings have been initiated. The A.O. merely mentioned at the bottom of the assessment order after computing the income that “penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act have been initiated separately.” Thus there is a violation of the Law in the matter. We, therefore, do not find any justification to levy the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act against the assessee. In view of the above discussion, we set aside the Orders of the authorities below and cancel the penalty.
SHRI RAJ KUMAR VERSUS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-62 (2), NEW DELHI.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22690 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83645&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
In the instant case, the trading liability or the expenditure or deduction was claimed by the assessee in respect of interest paid on the OCC loan. In respect of principal amount, though the assessee has gained the benefit by way of one time settlement the same cannot be brought to tax u/s 41(1) because the OCC loan represents the principal which was never claimed as expenditure. AO also did not make out a case that the principal amount was debited to the Profit & Loss account in the earlier years.
INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3 SRIKAKULAM VERSUS M/S SRI VASAVI POLYMERS P. LTD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22689 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83648&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
In the present case apparently, AE has not provided any capital to the appellant on which income is earned. It is a corporate guarantee, being a surety to the lender bank of the appellant that, if in a case, in future, the appellant fails to pay the due amount owed to those lenders, the Netherland Company will pay to those lenders. Thus, there was promise to reimburse the amount to those lenders on happening of an event i.e. failure of payments by the appellant of the dues owed to the lenders and lenders invoking the guarantee issued by the Netherlands company in favour of those lenders.
LEASE PLAN INDIA PVT. LTD VERSUS DCIT, CIRCLE-4 (1) , NEW DELHI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22688 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83653&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Deciding the issue in favour of the assessee in the said case where the addition made by the Assessing Officer by way of disallowance of the expenses debited as cost of ESOP in profit and loss account was deleted by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal.
NEW DELHI TELEVISION LTD, VERSUS ACIT, CIRCLE-13 (1), NEW DELHI AND (VICE-VERSA)
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22687 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83656&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
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
-
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
-
In the instant case, the reopening of assessment was made on the belief that rental income had escaped assessment. Whereas the rental income does not belong to the assessee and belonged to the HUF of the assessee. Though the PAN number of the assessee is mentioned in the 26AS, the assessee has not claimed the TDS in the return. These issues clearly show that the AO reopened the assessment without proper appreciation of facts. Therefore, we hold that the reopening of assessment is bad in law, accordingly we quash the notice issued u/s 148.
KILARI VENKATA ROSAIAH VERSUS ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1 (1) GUNTUR
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22684 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83641&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
A perusal of the order of the Ld. CIT (A) would further show that he has nowhere confirmed the protective addition on the ground that the said amount was paid by the assessee. Rather, the Ld. CIT (A) has clearly mentioned that the impugned amount related to the company and the protective addition was solely u/s 179 of the Act in the sole event of liability being fastened upon the company and its subsequent non recovery from the company.
SH. BINU NANU VERSUS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8, NEW DELHI.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22683 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83642&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
AO in this case had received the only information that the assessee had received a high premium along with share application money. However, this information alone, in our view, does not constitute any tangible material or to say any incriminating material to form a belief by the Assessing Officer that the income of the assessee had escaped assessment or to say in other words that the share application money received by the assessee was an unaccounted money of the assessee.
M/S INDO GLOBAL TECHNO TRADE LIMITED VERSUS THE ITO, WARD-1 (5) , LUDHIANA
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22682 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83644&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Asessee has offered a sum of ₹ 50 Lakhs on 15.03.2007 towards the advance tax payable for the Assessment year 2007-08. It is also pertinent to mention here that prior to seizure of the cash, the assessee had paid advance tax in four installments on 15.06.2006, 14.09.2006, 14.12.2006 and 08.03.2007, which is evident from statement of total income. Department did not adjust the aforesaid amount even though the cash was available with the department.
M/S. MARBLE CENTRE INTERNATIONAL P. LTD. VERSUS THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -1 (2) , BENGALURU
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22681 (HC-KARNATKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82995&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
S. 143(3)/ 292BB: Under CBDT Instruction No.5/2016, a case earmarked for 'Limited Scrutiny' cannot be taken for 'Complete Scrutiny' unless the AO forms a "reasonable view" that there is a possibility of under assessment of income. The objective of the instruction is to (i) prevent fishing and roving enquiries; (ii) ensure maximum objectivity; and (iii) enforce checks and balances upon the powers of the AO. On facts, there is not an iota of cogent material shown by the AO for the conversion from limited scrutiny to complete scrutiny. The PCIT has also accorded approval in a mechanical manner. S. 292BB does not save the infirmity. The assessment order has to be quashed as a nullity
Dev Milk Foods Pvt. Ltd vs. Addl CIT
(2020) TaxCorp (A.T.) 83612 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83612&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The objects of the assessee are very clear that the assessee is running various homes for different purposes to run such huge activity various buildings are required, therefore the assessee continuously carrying the construction activity according to the objects of the society, therefore the Assessing Officer without examining the issue and without considering the details filed, simply disallowed the entire expenditure incurred by the assessee is not correct. The assessee started the construction activity in earlier years i.e. A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2014-15 all the years the AO has allowed the expenditure incurred by the assessee.
DCIT (EXEMPTIONS) , EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE, VIJAYAWADA. VERSUS M/S. CARE AND SHARE CHARITABLE TRUST AND (VICE-VERSA)
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22679 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83626&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Assessee has demonstrated the availability of sufficient own funds for the purpose of making investment of own funds available as against total investment we hold that the said facts and circumstances of the assessee warrant no disallowance of interest in the present case, following the decision of the ITAT in the case of the assessee for assessment year 2011 – 12. Similarly in the case of administrative expenses we have noted that almost entire amount of dividend income has been earned from subsidiary company of the assessee in which investment was made in the preceding years only.
VARDHMAN TEXTILES LIMITED VERSUS THE A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, THE D.C.I.T, J.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, LUDHIANA
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22678 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83627&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.