We noted that the turnover has increased more than double and consequently expenses have increased little more than doubt on both counts i.e., salary as well as EB charges. We noted that the AO has made estimated disallowance on the basis that the assessee has not furnished any separate documents like details of staff or details of electricity bills.
Poonawalla Finance Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Pune) The only issue pressed is about restricting the addition under Rule 8D of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 by considering only such investments which yielded tax free dividend income. Hon’ble Delhi High Court in ACB India Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 374 ITR 108 (Del) has held that the […]
HC held that despite lapse of four years and a scrutiny assessment, there is fresh tangible material in the present case in the form of information of beneficiaries of bogus LTCL/STCL report prepared by the office of Deputy Director of Income Tax (Investigation) which reveals that Mahanivesh (India) Ltd. is a penny stock whose share price was manipulated in trade by way of a complex web of pre-arranged or artificial transactions to book long term/short term capital gain/loss to the beneficiaries.
ACIT Vs Bharat Carriers ltd (ITAT Cuttack) Under sub-item 2(ii) of Item III of Appendix I of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, higher rate of depreciation is admissible on motor trucks used in a business of running them on hire. Therefore, the user of the same in the business of transportation of the assessee is […]
Bhikhabhai Ambalal Patel Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad) Ld. AR submitted that mere existence of addition during the assessment proceedings does not attract provisions of Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. In the present case, the CIT(A) has not pointed out as to on what basis the penalty was imposed. In fact, notice under Section 274 read […]
Rakesh Kumar Tibra Vs Commissioner of Central Goods (CESTAT Delhi) In view of the Final Order of this Tribunal dated 3.5.2019, in the case of Lucky Tobacco Co. Ltd. and Others, arising from the same impugned order-in-original, we find that the cause of action against these appellants also does not survive. In this view of […]
Swaraj Builders Vs ITO (ITAT Raipur) Assessee had failed to comply with the mandate of law and had failed to deduct tax at source u/s.194A of the Act on the aforesaid amount of interest payment of Rs.7,46,025/-. Accordingly, the A.O had disallowed the amount of Rs.7,46,025/-u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act which was thereafter, upheld by the […]
Global Waste Management Cell Pvt. Ltd. Vs Centralised Processing Centre (ITAT Mumbai) The facts in the present case shows that form number 3CD where the statement of particulars required to be furnished u/s 44AB of the income tax act 1961 are prepared by the assessee and is not an audit report. Form number 3CA is […]
Amritha Raj gets a second chance at appeal in ITAT Bangalore. Non-appearance costs imposed but opportunity granted to present case before CIT(A)
Balani Infotech P. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) It is for an assessee as a businessman to come to a conclusion as to what remuneration of the salary is to be paid to the employees and the reasonableness of the expenses is to be judged from the angle of a businessman rather than from angle […]
