Shri Vembu Vaidyanathan Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) Left with the relevant date to decide in the facts of the case, the decision of the Tribunal in Purushottam Govind Bhat’;s case (supra) really comes to favour the assessee. In the said case, the assessee joined the society in 1977. He was allotted a flat and occupied […]
Notification No. 78/2015 – Income Tax The prescription in respect of the diseases or ailments specified in sub-rule (1) shall be issued by the following specialists:- (a) for diseases or ailments mentioned in clause (i) of sub-rule (1) – a Neurologist having a Doctorate of Medicine (D.M.) degree in Neurology or any equivalent degree, which is recognised by the Medical Council of India;
The Bombay High Court has held in the case of TNT India private Limited v. Principal CIT that Writ Petition could be allowed if the due procedure have not been followed while suspending the registration under Regulation 14 of Courier Imports and Exports (Clearance) Regulations, 1998.
Kind attention is invited to Circular No. 890/10/2009 dated 3.6.2009 by which Board (CBEC) issued Order under Section 37B on classification of Coconut Oil packed in containers of the sizes up to 200ml. References have been received on the subject from field formations on need to review the Circular due to judicial pronouncements on the subject.
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.
