ITAT Mumbai held In the case of M/s Vidyasagar Enterprises LLP vs. Principal CIT that AO accepted the loss sustained by the assessee in this project to be allowed to be set off against other income of the assessee after application of mind and considering relevant material on record which was one
ITAT Bangalore held In the case of M/s Tejas Networks Ltd. vs. DDIT that the right that is transferred in the present case is the transfer of copyright including the right to make copy of software for internal business
In the Case of ACIT VI, Kanpur vs. Z Square Shopping Mall Private Limited, ITAT held that the interest earned on FDR, Gains from investment of Mutual Fund is not inextricably linked or connected with the construction activities
Centralized Processing Cell (TDS) has started sending notices to those deductors who have paid 40 to 60% lesser TDS during the period from April 1 to October 15, 2015 as compared to the corresponding period in Financial Year 2014-15. If as a deductor you have reasonable causes for less Deduction and less Payment of tax […]
ICAI Election 2015- List of Elected Candidate of WIRC Regional and Central Council THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA ELECTION TO THE TWENTY THIRD CENTRAL COUNCIL- WESTERN INDIA REGIONAL CONSTITUENCY Position NAME OF CANDIDATE AND SERIAL NO. 1 22. Zaware Shiwaji Bhikaji 2 21. Vikamsey Nilesh Shivji 3 8. Hegde Nandkishore 4 19. Shah […]
In the case of PVS Multiplex (India) Ltd. Vs. CIT Delhi Bench of ITAT held that CIT can pass order u/s 263 where he can hold that AO did not made adequate inquiry. ITAT observed that there is difference between lack of enquiry and Inadequate Inquiry.
In the case of ACIT Vs. M/s. Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. ITAT adjudicated two appeals against the order of CIT (A) who allowed the appeal of assessee in part. Both revenue as well as assessee filed appeal against the order of CIT (A).
In the case of M/s Tamil Nadu Cricket Association Vs. DDIT (Ex.) Madras Bench of ITAT have observed the activities carried out by assessee in nature of charitable or business. After detailed examination it was held that assessee did not engaged in any business or commercial activity and hence liable for the exemption u/s 11.
In the case of ACIT Vs. Shivaansh Advertising & Publications Pvt. Ltd. Delhi Bench of ITAT observed the requirements of section 153C provides for taking recourse to assessment in respect of any other person and held the conditions precedent are
In the case of Shri Vishal Dipak Shah Vs. Addl. CIT Mumbai Bench of ITAT held that Principle of Res judicata does not apply to the income-tax proceedings as each assessment year is a separate and self-contained assessment year. Therefore, the plea of the appellant that he should be allowed a relief on the same lines as he was allowed in the AY 2005-06 does not hold good. On the merits ITAT held that shares held by the assessee in the investment portfolio cannot be treated as stock-in-trade and consequently the transactions are in the nature of investment and not trading.
