The assessee has received Rs. 2,54,24,007/- as interest on enhanced compensation from HUDA after the compulsory acquisition of the agriculture land of the assessee, on which TDS @10% was also deducted.
Even after the submission CIT (A) ignored the fact and upheld the addition amounting to Rs. 32,00,000/- not at Rs. 18,50,000/- which was result of rectification order passed by the AO.
In a recent ruling Delhi HC remanded the proceedings to the AO to consider the Assessee’s alternate claim for loss arising out of the HTM securities, as loss under the head ‘income from business and profession.
In a recent ruling Delhi HC remanded the proceedings to the AO to consider the Assessee’s alternate claim for loss arising out of the HTM securities, as loss under the head ‘income from business and profession.
The PIL challenges the TDS system’s constitutionality, citing undue burdens, forced labor, and Article 14, 19, and 21 violations, advocating fairer tax practices.
Chhattisgarh High Court granted bail as no incriminating has been recovered at the instance of the present applicant in the matter of fake firm for availing fraudulent Input Tax Credit. Bail application allowed.
The assessee, expired on 30.10.2021. Notice dated 27.03.2023 u/s. 148A(b) of the Act was served on the address of the late assessee. The said notice was with respect to the assessment year 2019-2020.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that since the assessee, being an agriculturist was not well versed with tax proceedings, was unable to file required documents against addition on account of unexplained cash credit u/s. 69A of the Income Tax Act before AO.
Delhi High Court held that recourse to Rule 8D of Income Tax Rules for computing disallowance u/s. 14A not allowable since assessee’s computation of expense attributable to earning exempt income not found inadequate.
ITAT Mumbai held that once the source of cash is taxed, it cannot be further taxed as unexplained cash expenditure. Hence, addition under section 69C of the Income Tax Act for cash payments deleted.
