-
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
-
No hesitation to hold that the attachment and recovery was effected at a great haste, without taking into consideration of the parameters enshrined in all the decisions cited as above. Further, we take note of the fact that the issue pertaining to liability of the appellant bank for payment of income tax, remains now settled through the decision of a Full Bench of this court in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank v. CIT.
ANDOORKONAM SERVICES CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. VERSUS INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-2 (1) , THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22349 (HC-KERALA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82811&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The fact that Clause 10 of the Trust Deed states that the fees and charges shall be fixed taking into account the cost of running including future development thereof though without an element of profit motive indicates that the actual intention of the trust is only to generate income by charging fees while admitting children’s to their schools.
M/S. RAJAH SIR ANNAMALAI CHETTIAR FOUNDATION, VERSUS THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS)
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22348 (HC-MADRAS) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82812&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The fact remains undisputed is that ITO Ward-3(2) Jaipur who had issued sec. 148 notice dated 23.03.2016 did not have territorial jurisdiction to assess the appellant / taxpayer. The latter assessing authority i.e., ITO Ward- 46(1) Kolkata who framed the assessment had never issued any sec. 148 notice at all. We observe in these peculiar facts and circumstances that the relevant re-assessment framed in assessee’s case is not substantiate for want of a valid sec. 148 notice issued by the Assessing Officer having territorial jurisdiction.
GIRISH CHAND AGARWAL VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-46 (1), KOLKATA
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22347 (ITAT-KOLKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82733&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
-
The perusal of assessment order reveals that the assessee has not filed any details before the AO. Before CIT (A) the claim was made that the cash deposits in bank account pertained to textile business carried out by the assessee, though no books of accounts were maintained nor the bank account were disclosed in return of income.
SMT. KIRAN VALLABHAI AHIR VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 3 (3) (3) SURAT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22345 (ITAT-SURAT) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82738&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
A perusal of the record would indicate that basically the assessee has written off its inventory on the ground that such inventory has become obsolete; but when the Assessing officer has enquired to submit the supporting details, what is the nature of inventory, what is the shelf-life, how it became obsolete, then nothing was produced. In other words, the assessee should produce the details of inventory, year of manufacturing/purchase, how it is to be used and how it can be construed that it has no value.
M/S ORG INFORMATICS LTD VERSUS ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, RANGE-4, BARODA
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22344 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82739&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Tribunal has recorded concurrent findings of fact to the effect that there was no defect or infirmity in the books of accounts maintained by the assessee and has applied the decision of this court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Arrow Exim Pvt. Ltd to the facts of the present case. Under the circumstances, the Tribunal merely having applied the decision of the jurisdictional High Court to the facts of the case, the said ground of appeal does not give rise to any question of law, much less, a substantial question of law, warranting interference.
THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 VERSUS GOPALA POLYPLAST LTD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22343 (HC-GUJARAT) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82786&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Assessee along with the month-wise details of purchase and sale of wheat and wheat atta (flour) showed that the atta that was sold by the assessee was converted from the stock of wheat that was already available with it. Therefore, the purchase of stock of such atta was reflected in the wheat purchase account and not in the atta purchase account. The Commissioner (Appeals) noted that the assessee had submitted documentary evidence to demonstrate the same, which was found to be correct and it was seen that the quantity records and closing stock of wheat and atta confirms the explanation.
THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 VERSUS MOHMED SHAKIL MOHMED SHAFI MUTWALI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22342 (HC-GUJARAT) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82788&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The Occupancy certificate issued by BBMP is dated 30.03.2016. Hence in the present year i.e. F. Y. 2014 – 15 relevant to A. Y. 2015 – 16, the Building was not complete and therefore, what is sold cannot be flat but only right in the flat. Hence, it is seen that in the facts of the present case, capital Asset in question is not the flats but right to obtain flats from the builder.
ACIT, CIRCLE – 2 (2) (1) , BANGALORE VERSUS CA BADRINATH (HUF)
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22341 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82680&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
There is merit in the contentions of the assessee that the condition prescribed to the effect that the shares of venture capital undertaking should not have been listed in a recognized stock exchange shall apply only at the time of making investment. The VCF Regulations do not prohibit cases where the initial investments made in unlisted shares of Venture Capital undertaking becomes listed shares due to corporate actions.
THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 (2) (1) , BENGALURU. VERSUS M/S TRUE NORTH FUND IIIA (FORMERLY KNOWN AS INDIA VALUE FUND IIIA) AND (VICE-VERSA)
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22340 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82681&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the assessee had entered into an “agreement of sale” for purchase of an agricultural land located in Venkatala Village, Yelahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North Tq. A perusal of the said agreement would show that as per clause 4.6 of the agreement, the vendor shall effect conversion of scheduled property from agricultural to non-agricultural use.
THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-6 (2) (1) , BENGALURU VERSUS SHRI NARAYAN MANDYAM VEERABHUDHI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22339 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82682&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
From the sequence of the events, it is apparent that initially the assessee did not choose to contest the dismissal of deduction u/s 54F of the Act either by way of appeal or by way of Cross objections in spite of the fact that the assessee preferred cross objections on other issues. The order of the CIT(A), therefore, on the issue under consideration had become final.
M/S RAMAN SINGAL VERSUS THE ADDL. CIT, RANGE-1, CHANDIGARH
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22338 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82673&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
In the present case, the payments made to individual lorry drivers has not been disputed. It is not the case of Revenue, that payment made by the assessee are not genuine or the payee is not identifiable. The assessee has explained that it is his business necessity that the assessee had to make payments to lorry drivers to deliver coke at the doors of customers.
M/S. S.D. MINERALS PVT. LTD. VERSUS JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE –4 (OSD) SURAT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22337 (ITAT-SURAT) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82684&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
As during the year assessee had purchased the software and it was capitalized and the purchase of software has not been claimed as an expenditure. It is also a fact that no TDS was deducted by the assessee on the purchase price paid by it.
THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE – 6 (1) (1), BANGALORE VERSUS “FIS SOLUTIONS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, FORMERLY KNOWN AS M/S. SUNGARD SOLUTIONS INDIA PVT. LTD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22336 (ITAT-PUNE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82685&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
In the case of Manoj Kumar Jaiswal this Tribunal decided identical issue holding that the Act contains provision for declaring a return of income filed as invalid u/s.139(9) of the Act. There is no such provision for declaring a return of TDS as invalid. There is no power conferred, either under those provisions or under any other provisions of the Act, to declare the return of TDS filed u/s. 200(3) as non est.
SAROJA VASANTH VERSUS THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22335 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82647&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
In this case the AO noted that the assessee has not maintained any books of accounts and as such he has committed a default within the meaning of provisions of sec 44AA of the Act which made the assessee liable for penalty u/s 271A. AO thus imposed the penalty u/s 271A which was confirmed by the ld. CIT(A). During the course of hearing, the Bench noted that the assessee did not maintain the books of account as provided u/s 44AA as the gross receipts of the assessee from business was more than ₹ 10 lacs.
SHRI SHARAD KANKARIA VERSUS THE ITO WARD- 6 (1) JAIPUR
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22334 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82648&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Merely because of method of calculating the interest income as adopted by the assessee company does not match with that adopted by the AO then no penalty can be levied. We are conscious of the fact that law for making addition in quantum proceedings is different from the law for imposing penalty. In recognition of this fundamental difference, both proceedings have been kept separate and independent.
M/S. ACCME (URVASHI PUMPS) ENGINEERS (P) LTD. VERSUS THE ACIT CIRCLE – 4, JAIPUR
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22333 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82649&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
It is undisputed that the margin in trading of bullion is very less and 1% GP is considered as a reasonable prevailing margin. Thus, 99% of the export turnover can fetch only 1% margin being trading in bullion then in remaining 1.23% turnover of the assessee is representing the sale of jewellery. As per directions of the Bench the assessee has filed the details of exports from which it is clear that out of total turnover ₹ 53.56 Crore the turnover of trading in bullion is ₹ 52.96 Core and the turnover from sale of jewllery is ₹ 6,00,000/-.
SHRI NAVRATAN JOHARI VERSUS THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22332 (ITAT-INDORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82651&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The assessee has now produced a letter from SPM & Sons, Kollam wherein it was stated that it had insisted for cash payments in view of the fact that the goods sold to them were mill goods, which is in high demand - as stated that the assessee’s Bank account was located at Punalur and for encashing the cheque/draft would require time. It was further mentioned in the said letter of SPM & Sons, Kollam that the purchases were effected in most of the days after the banking hours.
SHRI VINU SELVARAJ VERSUS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4, KOLLAM.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22331 (ITAT-COCHIN) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82652&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.