The interest amount has been actually paid by the assessee through Overdraft/Cash Credit account and, therefore, set aside the disallowance made under Section 43B of the Act.
ITAT held that for the AO to assume jurisdiction u/s 271(l)(c), proper notice is necessary and the defect in notice u/s 274 of the Act vitiates the assumption of jurisdiction by the learned Assessing Officer to levy any penalty.
Berry Alloys Limited Vs Commissioner of Central Tax (CESTAT Hyderabad) We find that the main ground for denying the credit as discussed in the impugned order is that the Appellant failed to furnish sufficient documentary evidence that the impugned items were used in fabrication of capital goods/accessories/parts/components. The Chartered Engineer’s Certificate though produced before both […]
No Service Tax on stability studies and technical testing and analysis of new drugs were classifiable under taxable category of Scientific and Technical Consultant Service and Technical Testing and Analysis Service
Additions made primarily on basis of oral evidence of third parties, without giving fair opportunity of hearing and right to cross-examine those parties to assessee not sustainable
Neelkanth Town Planners Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) We find that the Assessing Officer has issued the penalty notice stating that, subsequently penalty notice u/s 271(1)(c) was issued on 20.03.2017, fixing the case for hearing on 24.03.2017. The assessee was asked to why penalty u/s 271(1)(c) should not be imposed upon you for concealment […]
Uma Strips Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) In this case ITAT find that there is no live link presented by the AO between the material available with him i.e. the report of the investigation and to reason to belief that the assessee has tried to evade the assessment for the particular year in question. Simply […]
Shri Sai Co-Operative Thrift and Credit Society Ltd. Vs ITO (Delhi High Court) In the present case, though the petitioner responded to the show cause notice, yet it could not provide all the relevant details and documents, as the time period of three days to respond to the show cause notice was inadequate. Consequently, this […]
Late Shri Nemichand Gunavanthraj Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai) We noted that the assessee has moved this petition under Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules and filed additional evidences i.e., confirmation letters from relatives, copies of Income-tax returns, copies of financial statements, copies of wealth tax returns of the relatives to prove the creditworthiness of the […]
The provisions of Section 18 of the Limitation Act are not alien to and are applicable to proceedings under the IBC
