Rajesh Mittal Vs ITO (ITAT Dehradun) The only issue pertains to application of provisions u/s 44AD of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee earned income from sale & purchase of derivatives which the AO held that the same should be treated as business income. The assessee has also incurred losses in the derivatives trading […]
The genuineness and the creditworthiness of the lenders cannot be disbelieved as the lenders filed returns and also filed confirmations. Therefore, I am of the view that the assessee has proved the genuineness, identity and creditworthiness of the lenders and, therefore, the Assessing Officer is directed to delete the addition made towards bogus un-secured loans.
SNS Constructions P. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) In this case there was a difference of Rs. 14,25,463/- between books of account and the payment received as per Form 26AS. The Assessing Officer treated the amount of Rs. 14,25,463/- as undisclosed receipts and added the same to the income of the assessee. Thereby the Assessing […]
Merely that there were huge turnover i.e. deposits and withdrawal in the bank account of the assessee without correlating the same with the accounts and with the nature of the business of the assessee, in our view, that was not enough to form a belief of escapement of income of the assessee for the assessment year under consideration.
Finance Act, 2020, inter-alia, inserted clause (23FE) in section 10 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 “) to provide for exemption to wholly owned subsidiaries of Abu Dhabi Investment Authority (ADIA), sovereign wealth funds (SWF) and pension funds (PF)
There is no prohibition for the NRI for accepting the gifts from the relatives. In the absence of any prohibition, no adverse inference can be drawn against the assessee based on the prevailing system in the society.
Stella Maris Church Malpe Vs ITO (Exemptions) (ITAT Bangalore) We notice that the date of hearing of the appeal i.e. 23.12.2021 was announced on the earlier occasion on 6.11.2021. On that day, the counsel of the assessee Smt. K. Soumya, Advocate has taken note of the date of hearing and hence there was no necessity […]
Suzuki Suiting Pvt. Ltd. Vs I.T.O (ITAT Ahmedabad) Admittedly, the difference in the price of the share issued by the assessee and its fair market value and calculated and certified by the C.A. is barely 1% of its total value. The difference being Rs. 2.81 against the share value of Rs. 200/-, it is meager […]
United Spirits Limited Vs Commissioner of Central Taxes (CESTAT Bangalore) CESTAT find that the adjudicating authority has confirmed the demand in respect of various fees paid to the State Government in respect of manufacture, import and sale of alcoholic liquor. The adjudicating authority, though dropped the demand on licence fee, but confirmed the demand on […]
Lokhandwala Construction Industries Private Limited Vs DCIT (Bombay High Court) In this case, during the original assessment proceedings, a notice dated 19th October 2019 was issued under Section 142(1) of the Act by which petitioner was called upon to furnish copies of Index II(s) of three flats sold during the year. Petitioner responded by its […]
