-
Bogus penny stocks capital gain: The s. 131 statement implicating the assessee is not sufficient to draw an adverse inference against the assessee when the documentary evidence in the form of contract notes, bank statements, STT payments etc prove genuine purchase and sale of the penny stock. Failure to provide cross-examination is a fatal error
Kamla Devi S. Doshi vs. ITO
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12957 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Condonation of delay: Government departments are under a special obligation to ensure that they perform their duties with diligence and commitment. Condonation of delay is an exception and should not be used as an anticipated benefit for Government departments. The mere fact that the AO was busy in other time-bearing assessments is not an excuse for delay particularly given the fact that s. 260A provides a long time period of 120 days. Every day’s delay has to be explained
CIT vs. Historic Infracon
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12956 (HC-DELHI)
-
ITAT - No disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r 8D(2)(ii) on bank guarantee commission paid as the same is not in the nature of interest expenditure.
Acumen Capital Marketing (I) Ltd. Versus The Income Tax Officer Ward 1 (1), Kochi
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12955 (ITAT-COCHIN) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=56334&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - If over the period of time the said product could not be sold and has become obsolete due to fast changing technologies and software programme, then it has to be left to the prudence of the businessman to write it off in the year in which it considers that the said product cannot be sold at all or it has become scrap.
Differential Technologies Ltd. Versus ITO Ward -10 (3) New Delhi
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12954 (ITAT-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=56339&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - No adddition on account of gain on settlement of loan either u/s 28(iv) or 41(1) as the instant loan was not utilized for the trading liability of the assessee and therefore the waiver off the same cannot amount to income which is chargeable to tax.
M/s J.K. Lakshmi Cement Ltd. Versus DCIT, Central Circle-VI Kolktaa, And Vice-Versa
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12953 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=56342&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - The calibre and expertise of the assessee has little or nothing to do with the inadvertent error. Absence of due care, in a case such as the present does not mean that the assessed is guilty of either furnishing inaccurate particulars or attempting to conceal its income. Imposition of penalty on the assessee is not justified.
Rameshbhai Ravjibhai Dobaria Versus Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -12 Ahmedabad
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12952 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=56346&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Depreciation on Capital subsidy - For the purpose of computing depreciation allowable to the assessee, the subsidy amount cannot be reduced from the actual cost of the capital asset.
DCIT, Circle-8, Ahmedabad Versus Sakar Glazed Tiles Pvt. Ltd.
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12951 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=56347&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - No depreciation on intangible asset acquired under a business transfer agreement.
Pitney Bowes India (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12950 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
ITAT - Since on the date of institution of the trust deed, the identities of the contributors/beneficiaries and their individual shares were not known, assessee trust cannot be considered as a Determinate Trust under Expl to Sec. 164.
TVS Investments iFund, Jayalakshmi Estates vs. ITO
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12949 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
-
ITAT - Revision u/s 263 - Merely because the DIT does not agree with the opinion of the A.O, he cannot invoke the provisions of section 263 to substitute his own opinion.
Technip UK Limited Versus The D.I.T. International - II New Delhi
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12948 (ITAT-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=56283&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Merely because the cost of the printer is abnormally high, the same cannot be ground to deny higher rate of deprecation @60%.
Shri Sumit Dev Versus The I.T.O Ward – 22 (1) New Delhi, And Vice-versa
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12947 (ITAT-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=56319&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - In case of unexplained capital introduced by the partners, the addition cannot be made in the hands of the firm and if anything remains unexplained the addition can only be made in the hands of the partners.
The Asstt. Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-7, Surat Versus M/s. Veer Gems
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12946 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=56323&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
S. 68 Bogus share capital: Entire law on the onus of the assessee and the department with regard to the genuineness of the share capital explained in the light of several judgements . Law on effect of not giving cross-examination to the assessee also explained
Arceli Realty Limited vs. ITO
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12934 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 68
-
Penalty u/s 272A(2)(c) for delay in filing TDS returns cannot be levied if the delay was caused due to requirement to collect PAN of payees. The non-availability of the PAN of the payees is a reasonable cause. The delay is unintentional and it causes no loss to the revenue as the TDS has been deducted and deposited in the treasury. Wrong levy of penalty u/s 272A(2)(k) (failure to deliver TDS certificate) instead of u/s 272A(2)(c) (delay in filing TDS returns) shows that AO is not clear of the charge and vitiates the penalty proceedings
Argus Golden Trades India Ltd vs. JCIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12933 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · Section 272A(2)(c)
-
ITAT - Claim of exemption u/s 11 - violating conditions u/s 13 - Foreign travel expenditure which has been incurred on the wife of Managing Director is not to be allowed as deduction.
Maharashtra Academy of Engineering and Educational Research Versus The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 1 (1), Pune
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12927 (ITAT-PUNE) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=56268&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Loan & advanced to the shareholders in the guise of share application money to the another concern / company. Dividend income is taxable in the hands of shareholders and not in the hands of the concern.
G. Indira Krishna Reddy Versus Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle – 2 (2), Hyderabad, And Vice-Versa
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12926 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=56269&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
S. 147/148 reassessment has to be based on "fresh material". A reopening based on reappraisal of existing material is invalid. The assessee's duty is only to disclose facts and not to make inferences. Consolidated Photo 281 ITR 394 (Del) is not good law
DIT vs. Rolls Royce Industrial Power India Ltd
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12923 (HC-DELHI) · Sections 147, 148
-
S. 153A: Entire law explained on whether concluded assessments can be reopened u/s 153A even in the absence of incriminating material found during the search in the light of the apparently conflicting verdicts in CIT vs. Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573 (Del) and Dayawanti Gupta v. CIT 390 ITR 496 (Del)
Pr CIT vs. Meetu Gutgutia
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12922 (HC-DELHI) · Section 153A
-
S. 132/153A: Important law explained on the preconditions necessary for the department to initiate valid search and seizure action u/s 132 and whether the assessee is entitled to challenge the same. Consequences of the search being declared void on the s. 153A assessment also explained
Ameeta Mehra vs. ADIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12921 (HC-DELHI) · Sections 132, 153A
-
S. 54F: U/s 161, a trust which is for the sole benefit of an individual, has to be assessed as an “individual” and not as an “AOP”. Consequently, a trust is eligible for s. 54F deduction
Balgopal Trust vs. ACIT
(2017) TaxCorp(LJ) 12905 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 54F
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.