Jaya Publications Vs DCIT (ITAT Chennai) We find that the assessee has purchased Computers for business purposes and claimed depreciation thereon. In support, the relevant invoices were produced. The only reason to disallow the depreciation is the conclusion of Ld. AO that the use of computers for business was not established. However, this conclusion is […]
The Assessing Officer as well as the ld. CIT(A) had chosen to disallow the entire expenditure without appreciating the fact that no income of hire charges can be earned without incurring expenditure on salaries and fuel etc. This approach of lower authorities is most unreasonable and arbitrary.
Section 200A deals with processing of statements of tax deducted at source. Clause (c) of section 200A(1) was inserted by the Finance Act 2015 w.e.f. 01-06-2015 providing for the levy of fee u/s.234E of the Act.
Rajendra Venkat Reddy Vs DCIT (ITAT Pune) The issue in the present appeal relates to the levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. The Assessing Officer sought to levy penalty in respect of addition of Rs.15,00,000/- being unexplained cash deposits in the bank accounts held by the appellant. The addition was purportedly made u/s […]
Toshiba Corporation Vs CIT (Delhi High Court) Admittedly, while deciding the stay application, the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A) have to consider three primary issues i.e. prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable injury. In the present case, the petitioner has not claimed financial hardship. Accordingly, the third factor i.e. irreparable injury is not […]
It is not possible to show the veracity of many expenses, because such expenses are running, on continuous basis for each and every trip. He further held that unless any major infirmity or irregularity can be found and proved, expenses cannot be doubted.
Punjab and Haryana High Court affirms ITAT’s decision on Anil Kumar’s appeal, upholding the assessment. Court rejects challenge on grounds of different treatment for 2014-15.
Mahendra Feeds and Foods (Trading Division) Vs Deputy Commissioner of GST and Central Excise (Madras High Court) The petitioner is a dealer under the GST regime. He has availed Input Tax Credit (ITC) for the Financial Year 2017-18 and 2018-19 from December 2017 to March 2019. But, according to the Revenue, the ITC claimed by […]
Chandresh Luniya Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad) The facts in brief are that the assessee in the present case is an individual and engaged in the activity of derivative business of shares and securities. In the present case it was found by the AO that the assessee has obtained the benefit of accommodation entries by way […]
Pur Opale Creations Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad) It is an undisputed fact that the assessee has disclosed particulars of loss in sale of assets before the authorities below. Instead of treating a loss as capital loss the assessee has treated the same as business loss and therefore, it cannot be said to have not […]
