Doloo Tea Company (India) Ltd Vs ACIT (ITAT Kolkata) Admittedly, in this case in hand, the land has already been treated as agricultural land not capital in nature and the tea bushes have been cultivated by the assessee to obtain tea leaves and the shade trees are grown by the assessee for the protection of […]
Merely because building was used by assessee-trust without consideration that cannot be said to be, in any way, any unexplained investment by assessee-trust justifying addition under section 69
A perusal of the instruction would show that PAN – AAACK4O32H concerns an entity going by the name K.G. Finvest Pvt. Ltd. This PAN does not concern M/s Kanhaiya Impex Pvt. Ltd. The petitioner’s stand that it had not entered into any transaction with M/s Kanhaiya Impex Pvt. Ltd. is correct. Given this position, in our view, both the notice which is issued under Section 148 A (b) of the Act and the order that was passed under Section 148 A (d) of the Act suffer from obvious errors.
Sardarmal Kothari Vs ACIT (ITAT Chennai) ITAT held that when an assessment has been made under sec.143(3) and not under sec.144 of the I.T. Act, it means that subsequent compliance in the assessment proceedings was considered as good compliance and the defaults committed earlier were ignored by the Assessing Officer and, therefore, there is no […]
B.L. Goel & Company Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & Central Goods & Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi) The brief facts are that the appellant is engaged in running Works Contract Services and services of construction of residential complexes during the period 2013-14 till 2017-2018 (June 2017). Show cause notice dated 23.04.2019 was issued demanding service […]
ITAT held that first of all the assessee has offered this in assessment year 2007-08, it cannot be added again and moreover, this being highly contentious issue and debatable whether this is to be assessed in assessment year 2007- 08 or 2009-10, it cannot be rectified while acting u/s.154 of the Act.
Ved Indian Heritage Haat Foundation Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad) Admittedly, the assessee is running its business from the rented premises which was taken for the lock in period of 60 months. Furthermore, in the rent agreement, there was the clause of renewal of the agreement. Accordingly, AO was of the view that the expenditures incurred […]
Explore the potential impact of the Russia-Ukraine war on Indias Budget 2023-24. Learn how geopolitical tensions may influence economic stability, prices, and foreign investments. Discover the budget amendments aimed at ensuring citizen welfare, education, employment, and infrastructure development.
Unlock the potential of your startup journey in India with a guide to government schemes, financing options, and step-by-step instructions. Explore initiatives like Start-up India, Stand-up India, and more. Learn how to set up your business legally, source capital, build the right team, market effectively, and scale for success. Empower your startup with valuable insights and navigate the entrepreneurial landscape in India seamlessly.
ITAT Delhi held that penalty u/s 271AAA of the Income Tax Act is leviable when the assessee has accepted the additional/undisclosed income during the statement recorded u/s 132(4) of the Act.
