ITAT Chennai held that if TDS is deducted by applying wrong provisions or at lower rates, the sum paid cannot be disallowed attracting provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act.
Bharat Agri Fert & Realty Ltd Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) It is observed that the assessee company has declared income of Rs. 28,80,000/-on sale of car parking and had claimed deduction on the same under section 80IB (10). The AO had rejected the claim of the assessee on the ground that the income earned by […]
L&T Infra Debt Fund Limited Vs CIT (Exemption) (ITAT Mumbai) In the instant case, we notice that the AO did not examine the exemption claimed u/s 10(47) of the Act, meaning thereby, the assessment order has been passed by the AO without application of mind. The exemption so allowed without examining the claim would be […]
Mittal International Vs ACIT (Delhi High Court) 1. Present writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act’) and notice issued under Section 148 of the Act, both dated 26th July, 2022 for the Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Learned counsel for the […]
Bar member challenges VP appointments at Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. High Court dismisses quo warranto petition. Legal eligibility affirmed.
Govind Ramprashad Baheti Vs ITO (ITAT Pune) The assessee admittedly runs Baba Ramdev Krishi Seva Kendra involving primarily rural customers engaged in agricultural activities. And that he carries out his business activities regarding sale of various agricultural products only. There is further no dispute that the recipient herein is also engaged in very line of […]
A scheme has been formulated whereunder issuance of notice under Section 148 of the IT Act has to be through automated allocation and in a faceless manner, whereas in the instant case, the aforesaid procedure has not been followed, rather the notice has been issued by a particular person and not in a face less manner.
Sathyanarayanan Radhika Vs ACIT (ITAT Chennai) ITAT noted that the loan amount of Rs. 1.25 Crores was taken in previous year from Shri R. Sathyanarayanan and the balance amount of Rs. 17,00,690/- was interest on the loan amount and this cannot be treated as unexplained and moreover, there is no failure of the provisions of […]
In re Sri Amareshwar Traders (GST AAR Karnataka) Considering the expression ‘any amount that the supplier is liable to pay’ in section 15(2)(b), can the service provider to be held liable for free of cost diesel, which is explicit contractual liability of the recipient of supply and therefore, free diesel is not includable in the […]
Applicant seeks advance ruling on issue of utilization of ITC available in the Electronic Credit Ledger and question is not covered under issues specified in Section 97(2) of CGST Act 2017.
