Deduction under section 54F was in respect of capital gain arising in the hands of wife of assessee, should have been claimed in the return of income filed by the wife of assessee, therefore, claim of assessee under section 54F was liable to be rejected.
Smt. Kalpana Shantilal Haria Vs. Assistant CIT (Bombay High Court) There can be no dispute with regard to the application of Section 292B of the Act to sustain a notice from being declared invalid merely on the ground of mistake in the notice. However, the issue here is not with regard to the mistake / […]
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in its recent order ruled that addition made under the Income Tax Act, 1961 solely on the basis of confessional statement without any supporting evidence is Invalid.
Sri Joy Barman Vs. ITO (ITAT Kolkata) From the foregoing discussion we note that the addition has been made by the AO on account of unexplained money and cessation of liability on basis of lack of evidence. Though the assessee’s explanation in respect of the credit card transactions and cessation of liability in the absence […]
Bhim Rao Ambedkar Educational Society Vs. CIT (Exemption) (Allahabad High Court) A categorical finding has been recorded that Society is not being run according to the objects, i.e., free health education and establishment of dental college without fee. He also pointed out that a Society if charging nominal fee to maintain its expenses etc., it […]
Auditors who have conducted audit of the Mutual Fund for 9 years or more, in terms of clause B (2) (iii) (b) of the aforesaid circular, may continue till the end of F.Y. 2018-19.
AO has treated the subscription of ICD as a loan which in our understanding is not a correct way to interpret an ICD, because it is a deposit made by the subscriber of the ICD issued by a company on a fixed rate of interest and hence it cannot be treated as a loan.
AO admitted that the entire amount which was added to income of assessee on protective basis was already assessed in the hands of the overseas companies on substantive basis
The Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has entered into five Unilateral Advance Pricing Agreements (UAPA) and two Bilateral Advance Pricing Agreements (BAPA) during the month of January, 2018.
It is requested that Assessing Officers may be directed to complete all Non-scrutiny cases for processing urgently. Assessing Officers may be directed to refer ITBA ITR- Processing Instruction 1 date 30.03.2017, ITBA ITR- Processing Instructions 2 & 3 date 08.11.2017 to thoroughly understand the process.
