ITAT Visakhapatnam held that revision u/s. 263 quashed as AO already disallowed the claim of depreciation while framing assessment and assessed income at NIL due to proper application of funds.
Delhi High Court held that once the nature and source of receipts have been satisfactorily explained/proved and AO has not contradicted the explanation/information given by the assessee, there lies no cause for initiating the reassessment action.
ITAT Delhi held that transfer of shares of company by one set of shareholders to another set of shareholders does not give rise to any taxable event in the hands of company and has no tax incidence in the hands of the company whose shares were subject matter of transfer.
Adjudicating Authority rejected the Application. Adjudicating Authority held that Section 7 Application need to be decided, the commencement of the Arbitration Proceeding before or after filing of Section 7 Application is immaterial.
Held that the direction of this Court has not been complied. Any order contrary / disregarding the direction of this Court cannot be sustained as it renders the order bad for want of jurisdiction.
ITAT Visakhapatnam remitted the matter since addition confirmed by CIT(A) by passing ex-parte order as assessee didn’t appeared nor complied to the notices. Accordingly, matter remitted back for fresh consideration.
ITAT Bangalore directed CIT(A) to condone delay of 484 days in filing of an appeal and consider the issue on merits as it is alleged that the addition is made due to incorrect reporting by auditor.
Meghalaya High Court didn’t entertained petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, for demand raised by EPF authorities for payment of damages and dues, due to availability of alternative statutory remedy.
ITAT Bangalore held that deduction towards reversal of provision for inventory written off due to obsolescence allowable since the same stands offered to tax in the year in which provision was created.
The assessee is engaged in the business of letting out buildings both residential and non-residential. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and accordingly statutory notices u/s. 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act.
