"10 December 2017" Archive

ICAI Clarifies on Rumors of Reservations in CA course

The Institute has come across certain messages that are being aired in social media that some persons have approached to the Court of Law seeking direction to the Institute for making provisions for reservation in the Chartered Accountancy course....

Read More
Posted Under: CA, CS, CMA | ,

Addition not justified for mere non-compliance of inquiry U/s. 133(6) & of summons issued U/s. 131

Phool Singh Vs. ACIT (ITAT Delhi)

Merely because 133(6) notices issued to the party returned un-served though it was the same address, which was supplied by supplier while filing its income tax return, no fault can be put on the shoulder of assessee....

Read More

ITAT confirms addition for cash seized by police not explained satisfactorily

Sri. P.P.Sharafuddin Vs. ITO (ITAT Cochin)

Sri. P.P.Sharafuddin Vs. ITO (ITAT Cochin) The amount of Rs. 14 lakh was seized by the police from the assessee on 03.03.2008. At the time of seizure, the assessee did not mention that the amount seized belongs to his uncle. Because of the suspicious behavior and lack of explanation on the part of the assessee, […]...

Read More

Payment of Arbitration Award cannot form part of Cost Base for Margin Calculation

Hyundai Rotem Company Vs. ACIT (ITAT Delhi)

ITAT Delhi, last week held that the transaction of making payment of Rs. 95,50,31,150/- (on account of arbitral award) by Hyundai Rotem Company to the DMRC made on behalf of its AE would not part of the margin calculation to be added to revenue and cost for bench marking the international transaction....

Read More

Voluminous documents produced by Assessee cannot be discarded merely on the basis of statement of two individuals

Pr CIT Vs Paradise Inland Shipping Pvt. Ltd (Bombay High Court at Goa)

Pr CIT Vs Paradise Inland Shipping Pvt. Ltd (Bombay High Court) Once the Assessee has produced documentary evidence to establish the existence of such Companies, the burden would shift on the Revenue-Appellants herein to establish their case. In the present case, the Appellants are seeking to rely upon the statements recorded of two perso...

Read More

Reopening of assessment not permitted if no Failure of Assessee to disclose material facts

Biddle Sawyer Limited Vs. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai)

Assessing Officer expected the assessee to disclose, and which were necessary for his assessment but not disclosed. Therefore, factually speaking, we find enough weight in the plea canvassed that there has been no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose the material facts as required by the proviso to Sec. 147 of the Act and thus,...

Read More

Section 153C Assessment is without Jurisdiction if documents seized not belongs to Assessee

A.C.I.T. Vs. Empire Casting Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Delhi)

While dismissing the appeal filed by the revenue the Delhi bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) recently held that assessment under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act without jurisdiction when documents seized not belonged to the assessee is invalid. ...

Read More

Allowability of Investment in new asset after furnishing of return U/s. 54

Anita Ajay Shad Vs ITO (ITAT Ahemdabad)

Anita Ajay Shad Vs ITO (ITAT Ahemdabad) When an assessee furnishes return subsequent to due date of filing return under section 139(1) but within the extended time limit under section 139(4), the benefit of investment made upto the date of furnishing return of income under 139(4) cannot be denied on such beneficial construction of section...

Read More

Penalty u/s 271C can be levied for non-deduction of TDS and not for delayed deduction of TDS

ITO Vs. M/s Liver Foundation (ITAT Kolkata)

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata bench recently ordered that the penalty u/s 271C of the Income Tax Act cannot be levied for the delayed deduction of TDS amount....

Read More

Builders demanding higher Tax Post GST Roll out will deemed to be profiteering

It is advised to all builders / construction companies that in the flats under construction, they should not ask customers to pay higher tax rate on installments to be received after imposition of GST. Despite this clarity on law position, if any builder resorts to such practice, the same can be deemed to be profiteering under section 171...

Read More
Posted Under: CA, CS, CMA |