The same was responded to by the Chartered Accountant and on becoming aware of the legal representatives of the deceased-original assessee order dated 30.07.2022 was passed u/s. 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Assessee is a credit cooperative society engaged in the business of providing credit facilities to its members for A.Y. 2014 – 15, filed its return of income after claiming deduction u/s. 80 P (2) (a) of the income tax act.
Allahabad High Court granted bail to applicant involved in criminal matter based on the principle of ‘bail is a rule and jail is an exception’ and also concluding that there are no chance of absconding.
ITAT Kolkata held that amendment to section 43CA of the Income Tax Act vide the Finance Act, 2020 via which tolerance band for deviation between actual sale price and stamp duty valuation increased from 5% to 10% has retrospective application.
ITAT Mumbai held that the deeming fiction of section 50C Income Tax Act cannot be extended while working out the written down value (WDV) for the purpose of claiming deprecation on the block of the asset. Thus, disallowance made is liable to be deleted.
ITAT Ahmedabad condoned the delay of 611 days in filing of an appeal considering the fact that the assessee is a layperson with limited familiarity with the intricacies of the e-portal system.
NCLAT Delhi condoned delay of five days in filing of an appeal as sufficient explanation given by the appellant for the condonation. Accordingly, delay condoned in terms of section 61(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
Delhi High Court held that the disallowance of expenditure is not sustainable as the evidence and material produced by the assessee establish that it had incurred the expenditure as claimed. Thus, findings of ITAT cannot be perverse.
Delhi High Court held that provision of service by associated enterprise doesn’t include the element of ‘make available’ of technology to the assessee. Thus, benefit of Article 12 of India-USA DTAA available to such payment and hence TDS not deductible on the same.
CESTAT Delhi held that declared price is price for delivery at the time and place of importation unless contrary proved by department. Since onus not discharged, the declared price remains unimpeached.
