-
In the case of the assessee where substantial activities were carried out by the assessee, since the date of incorporation which had culminated in raising loans, making investment in purchase of land, which was reflected as stock in trade and also advancing loans to associate concerns for purchasing different pieces of land, in order to fulfil the condition of Land Bank of 100 Acres or more, to develop the township in Haryana and where the assessee is entered into development agreement at the close of the present year/beginning of the next year, then assessee can be said to have set up and commenced its business.
JINDAL REALTY PVT LTD. VERSUS THE ACIT, CIRCLE-10 (1) , NEW DELHI.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22710 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83713&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
It is a fact that along with the appeal memo filed in Form-36 the Assessee has also attached a copy of Form-10 filed before the AO. It is therefore, not correct on the part of the Tribunal to observe in the impugned order that Form-10 was not filed before the Tribunal. Apart from the above, also find that along with Form-10, a copy of the Board Resolution of the Assessee trust has been enclosed in which the purpose for which the accumulation is sought is clearly set out as “for construction of temple, 'Upashraya, Dharmashala' and objects of the trust”. It is thus, clear that the order of the Tribunal suffers from an error apparent on the face of the record which requires to be rectified.
DEVICHAND KESAJI SWETHAMBAR JAIN TRUST VERSUS THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2 (1) (1) , BANGALORE
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22709 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83714&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Financial asset has been described in the Act as share or security and the assets transferred by the assessee does not fall in the category of financial asset. This view is further affirmed by section 2(11) of the I.T.Act, which defines the term block of asset for the purpose of depreciation. The definition u/s 2(11) of the I.T.Act includes intangible assets. Since the intangible assets are covered in the definition of block of asset eligible for depreciation, the same cannot be again covered under the definition of financial asset as per Explanation (1) (i) (d) to section 2(42A) of the I.T.Act.
THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 1 TIRUR VERSUS M/S. FEROKE BOARDS LTD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22708 (ITAT-COCHIN) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83695&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
No detail finding given by the CIT(A) as regards to how the concealment of particular of income relating to the confirmation in respect of unsecured loan/receipt of cash and insurance commission comes within the purview of Section 271(1)(c).
DEVENDER KUMAR C/O. RAJESH KUMAR GOYAL VERSUS ITO WARD-1 HISAR
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22707 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83697&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
It is very clear that payment made to M/s Metcon India is a bogus expenditure which was routed through own associated company in order to reduce profit from sale of land at Nagpur. The AO had also obtained external information and conducted field enquiry which clearly proves the fact of not carrying out any development work at Nagpur Land. In fact the position of land was unchanged when compared to date of purchase and date of inspection and this fact was further strengthened by the letter of Jt. MD, MSHCL. The ld. CIT(A) has ignored all these facts while allowing relief to the assessee.
ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, THANE VERSUS M/S. HALLMARK DEVELOPERS AND M/S. HALLMARK DEVELOPERS VERSUS JCIT, PALGHAR RANGE, PALGHAR.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22706 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83701&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ld DRP is higher authority, therefore AO ought to follow the direction of ld DRP. AO had neither follow the directions of ld DRP nor he had examined the submissions, documents and details filed by the assessee in right perspective, as noted above. Therefore, we direct the AO to examine the assessee`s claim in respect of provisions for bad and doubtful debts and adjudicate the issue in accordance to law.
M/S PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS ACIT, CIRCLE-2 (2) , KOLKATA
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22705 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83702&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The ld CIT(A) has returned a finding that possession of the said land was never handed over & land is still in the possession of appellant himself. Transferee, Shri Rajeev Singh has not taken possession of the property. Secondly, he has not discharged the sale consideration nor there is any willingness on his part to discharge the sale consideration as can be gauged by the fact that he himself has ordered and instructed his bank for stop-payment of cheques issued earlier by him towards the sale consideration in respect of both the sale deeds.
ACIT, CIRCLE-02, KOTA VERSUS SH. IJYARAJ SINGH AND (VICE-VERSA)
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22704 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83703&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Assessee had earned profit from F & O transactions in A.Y.2010-11 which was duly taxed by the ld. AO as regular business income. During the year, there is no change in the facts or there is no emergence of any fresh development in the case of the assessee company, enabling the ld AO to take a divergent view. Hence, revenue is not justified in taking a divergent view for the year under consideration alone.
M/S. MEGHA PROPERTY DEVELOPERS LTD. VERSUS ITO-4 (2) (4) , MUMBAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22703 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83704&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
AO has rejected the book results of the assessee based on the facts and figured that the assessee after purchasing the products has sold the same within short span at a price lower than the purchase cost. However, there are certain undisputed facts that the books of accounts were subject to audit under companies Act and under section 44AB under Income Tax Act. As per the assessee the goods were of poor/inferior quality, therefore the same were sold at a lower price. The ld. AR in support of his contention drew our attention on page 38 of the paper book.
M/S. PANCHSHIL EXIM PVT. LTD. VERSUS D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAJKOT.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22702 (ITAT-RAJKOT) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83678&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
We are of the view that the decision of the ITAT Bangalore Bench in the case of CAE Flight Training (I) Pvt. Ltd. supports the plea of the assessee for allowing deduction on interest paid on CCDs held that the fact that the RBI under its Foreign Direct Investment Policy mandates conversion of debentures into equity and such mandate will not make any difference to the allowability of interest on debentures u/s. 36(1)(iii).
IMS HEALTH ANALYTICS SERVICES PRIVATE LTD. [FORMERLY IMS HEALTH INDIA PVT. LTD. SINCE MERGED] VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 3 (1) (1) , BANGALORE.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22701 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83680&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Where registration has been granted to the trust or institution under section 12AA, then, the provisions of sections 11 and 12 shall apply in respect of any income derived from property held under trust of any assessment year preceding the aforesaid assessment year for which assessment proceedings are pending before the assessing officer as on the date of such registration and the objects and activities of such trust or institution remain the same for such preceding assessment year. It has to be held that an assessment proceeding which is pending in appeal before appellate authority should be deemed to be 'assessment proceedings pending before Assessing Officer' within meaning of that term as envisaged under proviso to section 12A(2).
INSTITUTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE (IMC) VERSUS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, BAGALKOT.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22700 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83681&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
It should be proved that there existed reasonable and acceptable cause for not accepting the loans or deposits through crossed cheques or demand drafts. It was found that the mere proof regarding genuineness of the transaction or the intention in accepting the amounts in cash or that there was no attempt to induct black money into the business etc. cannot be considered as a reasonable cause or as compelling circumstances provided under Section 273B to avoid the penal action contemplated u/s 271D, with respect to violation of the provisions contained under Section 269SS.
N.S.S. KARAYOGAM VERSUS THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22699 (HC-KERALA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83008&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
It is axiomatic that property sold is referred to as original asset and the original asset is prescribed as buildings and lands appurtenant thereto and being a residential house. The expression a residential house therefore, includes building or lands appurtenant thereto. It cannot be construed as one residential house. It is well settled in law that an Amending Act may be purely clarificatory in nature intended to clear a meaning of a provision of the principal Act, which was already implicit.
ARUN K THIAGARAJAN VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) , THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 3 (1)
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22698 (HC-KARNATAKA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83014&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
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-KARNATAKA) · 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
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.