-
The assessee had received the bogus gift of certain amount which, in fact, was the income of the assessee introduced in her funds in the shape of the gifts. As the assessee was not able to produce said persons for confirmation of gift and the creditworthiness of the donors could not be proved by the assessee, the Assessing Officer made addition under section 68 which was confirmed in appeal.
VERMA SERVICE STATION BYE PASS ROAD, FIROZABAD. VERSUS DCIT, CIRCLE 2 (2) (1) , FIROZABAD.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20094 (ITAT-AGRA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77708&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Assessee was under a bonafide belief that no tax is required to be deducted at source on such payments, firstly, for the reason that agreement was between DTCP, who is Governmental authority and licence was granted by the Government and EDC charges was directed to be paid to HUDA, therefore, this could led to reasonable cause that TDS was not required to be deducted.
SHIV SAI INFRASTRUCTURE (P) LTD. VERSUS ACIT, CIRCLE-77, NEW DELHI
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20093 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77707&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Income disclosed by the assessee in the Return of Income which is not part of Regular Accounts is liable for levy of penalty u/s.271(1)(c) and (ii) the order of the CIT(A) directing the AO to levy penalty u/s. 271AAA of the Income Tax Act on the undisclosed income cannot be sustained. Hence the action of the Assessing Officer to sustain the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) levied vide order dt 27/6/2011 in the revision order dt 13/1/2017 is upheld. is justified and hence, we do not find any merit in the assessee’s appeal.
SMT. R. MAHALAKSHMI VERSUS THE ACIT, NON-CORPORATE CIRCLE – 17 (1), CHENNAI.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20092 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77705&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
There is no representation from the side of the assessee to bring on the facts and relevant financial statement on record. Necessary details have been examined including the muster roll. CIT(A) seems to be satisfied with the details mentioned therein and also referred to minor discrepancy in the records. Mainly various vouchers of labour payments are unsigned.
ITO 5 (1) BHOPAL VERSUS SHRI PRABHAKAR COLONIZERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20091 (ITAT-INDORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77702&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
S. 147/148: It is mandatory for the AO to follow the procedure laid down in GKN Driveshafts 259 ITR 19 (SC) and to pass a separate order to deal with the objections. The disposal of the objections in the assessment order is not sufficient compliance with the procedure. The failure to follow the procedure renders the assumption of jurisdiction by the Assessing Officer ultra vires (Bayer Material Science 382 ITR 333 (Bom) & KSS Petron (Bom) followed)
Fomento Resorts & Hotels Ltd vs. ACIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20090 (HC-BOMBAY) · Sections 147, 148
-
ITAT offers suggestions on how to remove hindrances to India's goal to become a $5 Trillion economy. Violations of tax laws by new assessees occur because of lack of proper advice. Instead of letting these sparks of economic change stifle and die due to fear of compliances, they should be assisted by the State. (i) Set up a Tax Advisory Cell consisting of public spirited Revenue officers with strong ethics, full awareness of tax laws and people skills (ii) Identify new successful businesses as the agents of economic change (e.g. Haldiram, Lijjat Papad) and assist them, (iii) Create a Tax Compliance Scheme specially for the benefits of these new ventures so as to address their past lack of compliance
Asha Gandhi vs. ITO
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20089 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
-
S. 10AA/ 115JB: Even income arising from the business of a SEZ Unit, which is exempt u/s 10AA, is subject to MAT from AY 2012-13 onwards owing to the insertion of the proviso to s. 115JB(6). The earlier judgements holding that the exemption provisions would prevail over s. 115JB are not good law after the insertion of the proviso to s. 115JB(6) (CBDT Circular No. 2/2012 dated 22.5.2012 referred)
Safeflex International Ltd vs. ITO
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20088 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · Sections 10AA, 115JB
-
Assessee has discharged his duties imposed u/s 68 of the Act by establishing the identity of the lenders, the genuineness of the transactions and creditworthiness of the lenders. Assessee has taken a loan in the assessment year 2005- 06 from Shri Shushibhai Patel which was not doubted by the Revenue in the assessment proceedings framed under section 143(3) of the Act.
M/S SOUTH SHOURNE CORPORATION (INDIA) VERSUS ACIT, CIRCLE-2 (2), BARODA.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20087 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77682&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The assessee can object to the reasons recorded after filing the return of income in response to the notice u/s. 148, and where so, the AO is bound to dispose the said objections per a speaking order prior to proceeding further in the matter. The assesseee in the present case has not raised any objection to the reason/s for issuing the notice u/s. 148 even till the date of the assessment.
LATE OM PARKASH GUPTA, [THROUGH LRS RAJ MOHINI GUPTA & ORS] VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 (2), JAMMU
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20086 (ITAT-AMRITSAR) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77684&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The assessee is not carried out any activity of construction or development of projects but the assessee is in the activity of converting the stone blocks into aggregate which is used in the construction unit. Therefore, the assessee is not a civil contractor but supplying the construction material to other companies engaged in the construction/infrastructure activity.
THE DCIT, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR. VERSUS M/S SHREE BALAJI ENTERPRISES
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20085 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77689&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Specific unretracted admission of the assessee of earlier undisclosed income and discrepancies in the books of account, we hold, is without any doubt the best piece of evidence against the assessee and is incriminating material enough representing undisclosed income for the purpose of levy of penalty under section 271AAB of the Act. The assessee had himself admitted to the fact of having not disclosed the income on account of brokerage and commission earned and had himself admitted to the fact that there were discrepancies and unrecorded entries in his books of account and also certain rough notings and estimates. Having himself admitted to all these facts and at no point of time having ever retracted this admission, the same constitutes incriminating material against the assessee.
SH. VISHAL SINGAL, SMT. SUNITA SINGAL VERSUS THE D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, LUDHIANA.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20084 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77688&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Voluntary payments made by parent company to its loss making Indian company can also be understood to be payments made in order to protect the capital investment of assessee company. It was further held that if that is so, then the payment in question could not be held to be revenue receipts, hence they were capital receipts in the hands of assessee.
NALCO WATER INDIA LIMITED VERSUS ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2, PUNE
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20083 (ITAT-PUNE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77692&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Local Committee, after considering the complaint filed by the petitioner, formed an opinion that the assessments for the subject matter Assessment Years cannot be termed as high pitched. As rightly pointed out by the learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondents, the mechanism provided to approach the Local Committee is not in lieu of the appellate remedy.
CARUNA BAL VIKAS VERSUS UNION OF INDIA, CHAIRMAN C&S, THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LOCAL COMMITTEE TO DEAL WITH TAX PAYERS GRIEVANCES FROM HIGH PITCHED SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20082 (HC-MADRAS) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=79875&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
The investigation carried out by the Department has brought the facts on record that the shares prices have been manipulated artificially, which purchased by a set of accommodation entry provider companies controlled by cartel of brokers, entry operator etc. In such circumstances, to say that sale transactions on the stock exchange were made in uncontrolled manner, will be on only an idealistic view and away from the reality of the market.
Shri Satish Kishore Vs ITO
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20081 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
Once the legal position clarified by the Courts have retrospective effect, it can be inferred that such legal position was always the correct position of law and was always prevailing. Though the order was passed by AO & CIT(A) initially was not in contravention of legal position existing therewith, it was in contravention of legal position clarified by SC. It can be said that the mistake was a patent mistake, and which was apparent from the record very much rectifiable under Section 154 of the Act.
Anandkumar Jain Vs ITO
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20080 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 154
-
Making of an Investment and incurring of expenses are two different aspects and the same are not found to be either overlapping or interchangeable. We are of a strong conviction that the A.O in the garb of scrutinising the investment made by the assessee in property could not have traversed beyond that and adverted to issues pertaining to incurring of the expenses in respect of the said property.
R. & H. Property Developer, Pvt. Ltd Vs Principal Commissioner of Income-tax -11
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20079 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 263
-
Income generated from leasing mall premises in the hands of the assessee (engaged in leasing and operating malls) constitutes business income and not income from house property.
Gulmohar Park Mall Pvt Ltd Vs Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20078 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
-
When the warrants are issued, the share price of the said company was Rs.133/-. By the time the right to convert the warrant to shares, the price of the share traded was less than Rs.60/- per share. Therefore, the assessee company has chosen to forego the share application money and incurred loss of Rs.6,60,00,000/-.
Sowraj Investments Pvt Ltd Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20077 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
-
Assessee is under bonafide belief not liable to be audited in the light of the guidance note issued by the ICAI and constitutes reasonable cause u/s 273B for non-levy of penalty u/s 271B.
Jude Angelo Menezes Vs ITO
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20076 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
-
In Section 193 declaration made by misrepresentation or suppression of facts such declaration shall be void and shall be deemed never to have been made under the scheme. There is no provision as such in the IDS to afford the declarant a hearing prior to passing an order holding such declaration to be void for being in contravention of Section 193 of the FA, 2016.
Ankush Jain Vs PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20075 (HC-DELHI)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.