ITAT Mumbai held that allotment letters issued for purchase of flat should be considered as ‘Agreement to sell’ for the purpose of section 56(2)(x) of the Income Tax Act.
Delhi High Court held that department cannot ignore an order passed by the appellate authority merely stating that it proposes to file an appeal against the said order.
ITAT Delhi held that penalty under section 271B of the Income Tax Act not leviable as assessee is a local authority and it cannot be considered to be one engaged in ‘business’ or to be earning profit.
ITAT Kolkata held that grants from the West Bengal State Government to cooperative societies are not income from other sources and eligible for deduction under section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Delhi High Court held that order passed under section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act without dealing with the request for accommodation and according without hearing the petitioner is in violation of principles of nature justice and hence liable to be set aside.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that income is not taxable in India merely because the overseas employer paid salary into NRE account of the assessee in India.
ITAT Mumbai held that recording of satisfaction for initiating penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is not in accordance with the provisions of the Act, accordingly, penalty u/s 271(1)(c) not sustained.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that imposing penalty under rule 209A against the person who is only involved in maintaining the accounts of the company is unjustified and unsustainable in law.
CESTAT Chandigarh held that re-classification from ‘Commercial or Industrial Construction Services’ to ‘works contract service’ justified as contract and VAT registration proves that contract is work contract service.
ITAT Mumbai held that as there was no malafide or deliberate in action on the part of the assessee in filing the appeal with delay of 387 days before the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, it was directed to CIT(A) to condone the delay.
