-
ITAT - Gift received by the assessee from his brother-in-law is exempted from tax under section 56 - Instead of relative as provided by the statute “blood relative” has been considered by the AO and as a result whereof addition was made which is absolutely erroneous.
DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE -2, BARODA. VERSUS SHRI ARVIND N. NOPANY
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16585 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=70158&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Absence of plant and machinery would not lead to a conclusion that there was no ‘manufacturing’ activity - Allows Sec. 10B benefit.
Unique Gem & Jewellery Vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16584 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 10B
-
SC - HC order holding that one bogus donation would not establish that the activities of the trust are not genuine is erroneous and runs contrary to the plain language of Section 12AA(3).
Jagannath Gupta Family Vs Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16583 (SC)
-
ITAT - Trade advances received for the purpose of supply of goods dealt by the assessee cannot fall under the purview of section 269SS of the Act so as to attract penalty u/s. 271D,
M/S. CHEMMANUR METALS AND ALLOYS PVT. LTD. VERSUS THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16582 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=70138&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Exemption u/s 11 (2) - Even though property purchased in the name of chairman but the property has not only been used for residential purpose of the Chairman of the Society but has been extensibly used for conducting workshop by the faculty members, additions made by AO to be deleted.
ACIT, CIRCLE (EXEMPTIONS) , GHAZIABAD VERSUS ST. THOMAS ORTHODOX CHURCH SOCIETY (REGD.)
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16581 (ITAT-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=70140&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Undisclosed stock - Treating the book value of goods approximately at 40 percent of the MRP cannot be said to be an arbitrary guess work taking into consideration the traits of the industry, and therefore restriction of addition by way of estimate and preponderance of probability cannot be said to be arbitrary and illegal.
OMPRAKASH KUKREJA VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, GWALIOR
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16579 (HC-MP) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=75507&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Delay in filing a refund application - Beyond a plea of the sort the petitioner raises (concededly belatedly), there can not necessarily be independent proof or material to establish that the auditor in fact acted without diligence - claim of refund to be considered.
G.V. INFOSUTIONS PVT. LTD. VERSUS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 10 (2), & ANR.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16578 (HC-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=75511&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
SC - Cancellation of Registration u/s 12AA - - bogus donation - In view of the serious allegations made against the respondent trust, it is a matter for consideration of the issue, after giving opportunity as pleaded by the respondent but the High Court has committed error in entertaining the appeal against the remand order passed by the appellate- authority, and in quashing the order of cancellation of registration.
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), KOLKATA VERSUS JAGANNATH GUPTA FAMILY TRUST
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16577 (SC) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=75516&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Bogus Capital Gains From Penny Stocks: The assessee completed paper-trail by producing contract notes for purchase and sale of shares. of PIL. Mere furnishing of contract notes etc does not inspire any confidence in the light of facts. Test of human probability should be applied and apparent should be ignored to unearth the harsh reality (Sumati Dayal 214 ITR 801 (SC) & Durga Prasad More 82 ITR 540 (SC) applied)
Rajkumar B. Agarwal vs. DCIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16576 (ITAT-PUNE)
-
Bogus Capital Gains From Penny Stocks: Plea that opportunity to cross-examine the witness was not given & investigation report was not furnished is not relevant if assessee unable to successfully controvert findings of the AO and such argument was never made before the lower authorities
Pankaj Agarwal & Sons (HUF) vs. ITO
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16575 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
-
S. 251(1)(a): The CIT(A) has no jurisdiction to permit an assessee to withdraw an appeal and to dismiss it in limine. Notwithstanding the request seeking withdrawal of the appeal, the CIT(A) is obliged and duty bound under the Act to decide the appeal on merits
M/s. Deekay Gears vs. ACIT
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16574 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 251(1)(a)
-
ITAT - Rejection of books of accounts - Once assessee has filed all the details and the audit report and has given explanation with regard to each and every entry of the trading account including expenses incurred with evidences, then no adhoc estimation of income or disallowance of expenses can be made.
HARI OM KUMAR TAYAL VERSUS ITO-WARD-19 (2), NEW DELHI
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16573 (ITAT-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=70094&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Revision u/s 263 - No doubt, the assessment order is erroneous but not prejudicial to the revenue - revision order set aside.
PRAVARDHAN SEEDS PVT. LTD. VERSUS ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE – 16 (2), HYDERABAD.
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16572 (ITAT-HYDERABAD) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=70098&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Rate of depreciation on software is 60%.
COMPUTER AGE MANAGEMENT SERVICES PVT. LTD VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LTU-2, CHENNAI
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16571 (ITAT-CHENNAI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=69907&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - The source of cash deposit of ₹ 20.5 lacs on 8.7.2010 is the balance sale consideration received from the buyer of the property and which has been duly offered to tax by the assessee in his return of income. - No addition u/s 69A.
SHRI SUBHASH CHAND TOMAR VERSUS THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-2, ALWAR
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16570 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=69930&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - Assessee responded to the notice u/s 285BA by furnishing the ‘Nil’ transactions and the department did not make out a case that the assessee had the recorded reportable/specified transactions in the relevant financial year - Levy of penalty u/s 271FA is unjustified.
M/S GUNTUR DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK LTD. VERSUS DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INTELLIGENCE & CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION) , HYDERABAD
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16569 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=70092&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
HC - Writ Dismissed - AO justified in rectifying error u/s. 154 in case of non-conformity of assessment as per Jurisdictional HC ratio.
Hindustan Lever Limited Vs Joint Commissioner of Income Tax
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16568 (HC-CALCUTTA) · Section 154
-
ITAT - Merely because assessee claimed depreciation at 25% treating items to be plant, which claim was not acceptable to revenue, would not by itself attract penalty under section 271 (1) (c). The disallowance can at best be a wrong claim but not a false claim.
NEEL METAL PRODUCTS LTD. VERSUS ACIT, COMPANY CIRCLE 13 (1) NEW DELHI
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16567 (ITAT-DELHI) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=70025&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - The objects of cricket associations clearly demonstrate that these cricket associations exist and operate purely for the purpose of promoting cricket - When proviso to Section 2(15) cannot be invoked , the benefits of Section 11 and 12, which were declined only by invoking the proviso to Section 2 (15), could not have been declined.
GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATION, BARODA CRICKET ASSOCIATION AND SAURASHTRA CRICKET ASSOCIATION VERSUS JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), AHMEDABAD
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16566 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=70027&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
ITAT - The amount paid for removing encumbrances and settlement of claim is expenditure incurred in connection with transfer of a capital asset deductible u/s.48(1). The value of flat of 405 sq.ft. to be allotted in the new building should be accordingly reduced from the full value of consideration u/s 48(i).
SHRI DINAR UMESHKUMAR MORE VERSUS ITO, WARD-3 (3), MALEGAON
(2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 16565 (ITAT-PUNE) · http://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=70028&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.