ITAT Ahmedabad

Loose papers not giving full details are dumb documents with no evidentiary value

Nishant Construction Pvt. Ltd vs. ACIT (ITAT Ahmedabad)

It was held that impounded loose sheet can at the most be termed as dumb document which did not contain full details about the dates, and its contents were not corroborated by any material and could not relied upon and made the basis of addition....

Read More

Addition by CIT(A) without Opportunity to Assessee is invalid

Shri Vinodbhai Naranbhai Vaghani Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad)

Section 251(2) provides that the Commissioner (Appeal) shall not embark on enhancement of an assessment unless the assessee has been granted a reasonable opportunity of showing cause against such We find no reference to the issuance of enhancement notice in the appellate order of the CIT(A). ...

Read More

Forfeited share application money is Capital Receipt and is Not Taxable

DCIT(OSD) Vs Mahalaxmi Rubtech Ltd. (ITAT Ahmedabad)

It is a fairly settled law that forfeiture of share application money which has been duly received by the appellant in terms of prospect and credited to capital reserve account was a capital receipt....

Read More

ITAT confirms addition in respect of accommodation entries by Paper/ Shell Companies

Saanika Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT (ITAT Ahmedabad)

Revenue is believed to prove that the activities undertaken by the alleged company are not meeting commercial prudence and the working of this company is merely to provide accommodation entries. ...

Read More

S. 68 Onus of Assessee discharged on submission of names, addresses, PAN, bank statement, income-tax returns of Loan Creditors

ITO Vs M/s Riddhi Siddhi Corporation (ITAT Ahmedabad)

This appeal of Revenue for Asst. Year 2009-10 is directed against the order of ld. CIT(A)-XV, Ahmedabad, dated 2nd July, 2012 vide appeal No.CIT(A)-XV/406/ITO-9(1 )/1 1-12 arising out of the order u/s 143(3) of the IT Act, 1961 (in short the Act), framed on 23/12/2011 by ITO, 9(1), Ahmedabad. Following grounds have been raised by the Reve...

Read More

No Penalty for addition due to mere non submission of supportings

Farmson Pharmaceuticals Gujarat Pvt. Ltd. Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (ITAT Ahmedabad)

There is hardly any dispute about the settled law that quantum and penalty proceedings are altogether different and each and every disallowance/addition made in the course of former proceedings does not ipso facto attract the latter penal action as per hon'ble apex decision in CIT vs. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd. 322 ITR 158 (SC)....

Read More

Duty of AO in case of Reassessment after 4 Year of original assessment

ACIT Vs Shri Venkataraman S. Iyer (ITAT Ahmedabad)

AO bound to demonstrate that the assessee has failed to disclose material facts fully and truly which has resulted in escapement of income. If he fails to demonstrate this aspect, then, in the case where scrutiny assessment has been made and four years have expired, he cannot take action under section 147 of the Income Tax Act....

Read More

No Penalty when Quantum addition itself not sustained; No Statutory Obligation to follow FIFO Method for Stock Valuation

Pareshkumar Bhikamchand Shah Vs. ITI (ITAT Ahmedabad)

P:enalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act has been levied on the addition made by ld. Assessing Officer but when the basis i.e. quantum addition has itself been deleted by the Co-ordinate Bench,...

Read More

Section 40(b)(v): AO cannot compel assessee to charge interest or remuneration

M/s Sagar Foods Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad)

It is correct that the terms of partnership provided payment of interest at the rate of 12 per cent on capital of partners as well as remuneration to the working partners. The assesses, however, did not make payment thereof to the partners nor made any provision of liability in the books of account...

Read More

Deduction U/s. 80IB cannot be denied for low electricity Consumption when majority of work is Manual

ITO Vs M/s.Padmavati Arts (ITAT Ahmedabad)

First ground of the assessee for claiming the deduction under section 80IB was that it had started production in Asstt.Year 2004-05. Asstt.Year 2006-07 is the third year. Deduction under section 80IB was granted in Asstt.Year 2005-06 in a scrutiny assessment. ...

Read More
Page 1 of 2312345...1020...Last »

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (3,311)
Company Law (3,196)
Custom Duty (6,363)
DGFT (3,314)
Excise Duty (3,978)
Fema / RBI (3,110)
Finance (3,276)
Income Tax (24,146)
SEBI (2,644)
Service Tax (3,247)

Search Posts by Date

March 2017
« Feb