-
Once there was no incriminating material, neither any such information was available with AO, then where is the question of roping such an addition or making such inquiry in the assessment proceedings. If there would have been any incriminating document pertaining to the alleged bank account found directly or indirectly linking the said bank account with the assessee during the course of search, then only the entire scope of inquiry for the purpose of assessment could have been made and if there is no such incriminating material or seized document, then ostensibly assessment has to be confined to the seized document relating to the assessee.
ANURAG DALMIA VERSUS DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NEW DELHI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22510 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83333&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The assessee being natural guardian of minor sons is obliged to protect the interest of the minors as per The Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act and thus could not have diverted sale proceed of shares held by minor sons to repay bank loan of Rs. 4.25 Cr availed by a ALEPL.
Shri K. Srikanth Vs The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22509 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
-
Assessee's erroneous treatment of income/loss under a different head in earlier years does not act as an estoppel on the assessee to claim it as assessable under the right head subsequently, if it is found that income was actually assessable under a different head.
M/s Anant Raj Limited Vs ACIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22508 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
Since assessee was under bona fide and genuine belief that he was not required to sign consent waiver form and no incriminating material was found indicating assessee's direct or indirect involvement in opening bank account, there was reasonable cause for non-levy of penalty u/s 273B.
Anurag Dalmia Vs DCIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22507 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 271(1)(b)
-
The coverage under customs laws was very wide while we are dealing with 1961 Act read with 1962 Rules and coverage of the term computer software is restrictive to computer program which is recorded in any disc, tape, perforated media or other information storage device.
M/s. Pentamedia Graphics Ltd. Vs The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22506 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
-
It would be grossly unfair and unjust to deny the assessee the credit of TDS where the corresponding income has been assessed in its hand.
M/s. Easylink Insurance Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22505 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
The assessee has purchased the entire property within a span of 13 days in the month of February, 2015. An harmonious reading of the agreement for sale of the property and the registered sale deed clearly indicates that the assessee intended to purchase the entire property including the vacant land from the vendor Shri R. Selva Kumar.
SHRI MD SUNDAR RAO VERSUS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON-CORPORATE WARD -6 (2) , CHENNAI.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22504 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83317&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Vembu Vaidyanathan has taken note of CBDT circular no. 471 dated 15th October 1986 as well as CBDT circular 672 dated 16th Dec. 1993 and concluded that the assessee shall be deemed to have acquired rights in the property on the date of issue of allotment letter for the purposes of expression capital asset.
SHRI D.R. KUMARASWAMY VERSUS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3 (3) (4) , BANGALORE
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22503 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83318&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
A perusal of the deposit and withdrawals in the said bank account filed by the assessee shows that there are systematic deposits as well as withdrawals. The assessee is engaged in the business of readymade garments, therefore, taxing only the deposits without giving corresponding credits to the withdrawals, in my opinion, will be not justified in the instant case especially when the assessee is a small trader. Since the peak credit comes to ₹ 7,70,390/-, therefore, modify the order of the CIT(A) and restrict the addition to ₹ 7,70,390/-.
SANJAY JAIN VERSUS ITO, WARD-58 (3) , NEW DELHI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22502 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83319&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The assessee has paid interest on the money borrowed from the company namely SDIPL. This fact can be established from the details such as TDS certificate issued by the assessee to the company for the deduction of TDS on the payment of interest to the company. There is also Ledger account of the assessee in the books of the company showing the amount of interest received from the assessee by the company. There remains no dispute that the assessee has incurred interest expenses on the money borrowed from the company.
MOHAN B. AGRAWAL VERSUS D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-4 (2) , AHMEDABAD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22501 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83321&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Infosys Ltd., it possesses huge tangibles of more than ₹ 1,00,000/- Crores. It is a full-fledged risk bearer with a turnover of more than ₹ 12,000/- Crores. The functions of Infosys Ltd. are highly diversified, and branching out into product conceptualization, core design, research & development to marketing and sales of products, etc. No such function is carried out by the assessee. Being a captive service provider, its function is completely confined to software development services for its AE.
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-7 VERSUS OPEN SOLUTIONS SOFTWARE SERVICES PVT. LTD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22500 (HC-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82916&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Rule 27 embodies a fundamental principal that a Respondent who may not have been aggrieved by the final order of the Lower Authority or the Court, and therefore, has not filed an appeal against the same, is entitled to defend such an order before the Appellate forum on all grounds, including the ground which has been held against him by the Lower Authority, though the final order is in its favour.
SANJAY SAWHNEY VERSUS PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22499 (HC-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82917&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
In respect of an identical payment made by the assessee under the very same agreement for establishing cricket Academy for assessment year 2010-11, the issue was considered by this Tribunal and the Tribunal held that expenditure in question was revenue expenditure and should be allowed as a deduction.
M/S ROYAL CHALLENGERS SPORTS PVT. LTD. VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL RANGE-2 (3) BANGALORE
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22498 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83298&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Assessee has discharged the initial onus which lay on him in the terms of section 68 of the Act by providing identity of creditors and same has not been doubted by the AO also. Assessee has proved the creditworthiness by way of filing ITR returns, bank account, balance sheet, confirmation of the creditors.
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1 (1) (2) , SURAT. VERSUS M/S. KEJRIWAL INDUSTRIES LTD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22497 (ITAT-SURAT) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83306&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
As decided in own case, cost of software development services cannot be treated in this fashion as claimed by the assessee. Hence we do not find any merit or substance in the contention raised by the assessee on this issue. Assessee provides software development and support services to Applied Inc.
APPLIED MATERIALS INDIA PVT. LTD. VERSUS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE – 1 (1) (1) , BENGALORE.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22496 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83310&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Assessee was collecting rent on behalf of Government of India from the tenants and then remits that rent as it is back to the Government. The building is owned by the Government of India. Assessee is not the beneficial owner of the rent as property was given by the Government to the assessee for its use. Assessee was merely collecting the rent. Rent collected by the assessee is definitively its income and rent paid back to the Government is its expenses. It is a lease in & lease out agreement/understanding.
COUNCIL OF HANDICRAFTS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION VERSUS ITO EXEMPTIONS, WARD-1 (3) NEW DELHI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22495 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83313&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Revenue authorities have mislead themselves on holding that the purchase of the Rajendra Nagar flat out of the sale proceeds of the original asset was on the basis of wrong facts. Keeping in view the facts of the case that the capital gains have been utilized for construction of house at D-279, Defence Colony, New Delhi.
SUNIL MALHOTRA VERSUS ACIT, CIRCLE-54 (1) , NEW DELHI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22494 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83282&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The assessee is not benefitting in any way by not filing the appeal in time before the Tribunal. The assessee has explained the reasons as misplacement of papers by one of the office staff. This is one of the possible reasons for not being able to file the appeal within the time. Further, after hearing the assessee on merits also, we find that the assessee has an arguable case on merits.
M/S. SHAKTI HORMANN PVT. LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS SHAKTI MET DOR LTD) VERSUS DCIT, CIRCLE-3 (1) , HYDERABAD
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22493 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83283&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The payment pattern reveals that the assessee has raised separate invoices for O& M phase on a regular basis as per Section 5 of TOR Clause 8.3 and the same have been duly accounted in the years in which it has been received. On going through the entire facts of the case, we find that the three different phases of the work which are totally separate in execution.
VEOLIA INDIA PVT. LTD. (EARLIER KNOWN AS VEOLIA WATER (INDIA) PVT. LTD.) VERSUS DCIT, CIRCLE-26 (1) , NEW DELHI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22492 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83284&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Assessee in the case of a deceased person will be the person who are regarded as the legal heirs of the deceased as they can be regarded as a human being. In view of this, a person who has already expired cannot be regarded to be a human being as on the date when the order was passed. Only the legal heirs can be regarded as assessee in view of the provisions of section 2(7) of the I.T.Act.
SMT. SUJATHA SRI K.N. PRAFULLA KUMAR AND MS. K.N. RANJITHA VERSUS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 CHAMARAJANAGARA.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22491 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83286&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.