Gujarat Paguthan Energy Corporation P Ltd Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad)- For allowing any income based deduction to the assessee, if the assessee had not claimed depreciation and claimed the deduction without claiming depreciation then AO could not forcefully deduct the depreciation from profit & Loss Account.
ITAT Ahmedabad held in Megha Developers Vs ITO that as the assessee had entered into an agreement in which he had to bear all the costs related with the building of the project and also he was having the rights to receive all the payments from the members of the society
ITAT Ahmedabad held in M/s Sun Rise enterprise Vs ACIT that the insertion of clause d to sec 80IB(10) would be applicable from 01-04-2005 i.e the amendment related with built up area of commercial establishments not to exceed more than 5% of total built up area of housing project would have prospective effect not retrospective effect.
ITAT Ahmedabad held in Dhami Brothers Vs DCIT that if the assessee had not maintained any qualitative stock records to justify the sales price of diamonds and closing price of stock then the loss in the books of accounts would not be disallowed if after verification the AO had not found anything adverse about the transactions of the assessee.
ITAT Ahmedabad held in Sohan Builders Vs ACIT that if the AO had assessed the income of the assessee at some higher percentage than what the assessee had already shown in the computation then it would not amount to the concealment of income,
ITAT Ahmedabad held in M/s Anand Food Dairy & products Vs ITO that the deduction u/s 80IB(11A) would be allowed from the initial assessment year i.e A.Y relevant to the previous year in which the business was commenced but not from the A.Y of the incorporation of this provision in the I.T Act i. e not from -01-04-2005.
Relying on judgment of jurisdictional High Court in the case of Raajratna Metal Industries Ltd. vs. ACIT, [2014] 49 taxmann.com 15 (Gujarat) ITAT Ahemdabad held in the case of DCIT vs. Naroda Enviro Project Ltd. that the reopening of assessment solely on the ground of audit objection is not valid.
The ITAT Ahmedabad in the case of M/s Ruchi Developers vs. ITO, where Assessee has failed to produce creditor parties in respect of alleged Bogus Purchases while he submitted all other details and evidences and additions been made,
In the case of M/s Kantilal Siyaram vs. ACIT (ITAT Ahmedabad), the assessee has claimed that advance tax was paid, which was not recorded in the original return on the income which was remained to be disclosed in original return.
ITAT Ahmedabad held in case of ITO vs. M/s Tirupati Enterprises held that the revenue has to be recognized only at the time when substantial risk and reward are transferred to the buyer by the seller. Since the construction was incomplete, the property was not ready for sale.
