This is an appeal by Revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-Tirupati, dated 31-03-2017, treating the deposits made in the bank account as business turnover, whereas AO was of the opinion that these are unexplained income U/s. 68 of the Act.
M/s. Sri Sai Datta Mutual Aided Co-operative Credit Society Vs Asst. (ITAT Hyderabad) The AO and CIT(A) have considered the ordinary members and nominal members are different class of members. AO accepts that ordinary members are having mutuality but he denies the same with reference to nominal members. The principle of mutuality cannot be denied […]
ACIT Vs Gowthami Chemicals & Pesticides (P) Ltd. (ITAT Visakhapatnam) In this case, the assessee has furnished the confirmation letters explaining the identity of the shareholder, address and sources of income of the contributor to the share capital along with the evidence for land holdings and copies of IT returns in 4 cases before the […]
ACIT Vs Gowthami Chemicals & Pesticides (P) Ltd. (ITAT Visakhapatnam) In this case, the assessee has furnished the confirmation letters explaining the identity of the shareholder, address and sources of income of the contributor to the share capital along with the evidence for land holdings and copies of IT returns in 4 cases before the […]
Since assessee had made purchase from the grey market which gives the assessee savings on account of non-payment of tax and others at the expense of the exchequer, and when sales were also not doubted, in such situation, in the facts and circumstances of the case, 12.5% dis allowance out of the bogus purchases meets the end of justice.
These are four appeals by the assessee and revenue against each other against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XI & VIII, Ahmedabad, dated 25/11/2011 & 27/09/2012 for the Assessment Years (AYs) 2008-09 & 2009-10.
Briefly stated, the institution, Sri Visa Vadnagar Vanik Samaj, has earlier stated to have filed an application on 07-10-1988, seeking registration U/s.12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [Act]. It seems the said application has not been accepted/rejected by the Department. For the A.Y.2003-04 the AO has rejected the claim of assessee for exemption u/s.11(2) of the Act and has added an entire amount of Rs. 2,53,146/- to the income of assessee.
The only issue is to be decided as to whether the CIT-A justified in confirming the order of AO in determining the long term capital gain at Rs. 29,05,83,769/- against the claim of assessee as long term capital loss of Rs.25,05,20,775/- in the facts and circumstances of the case.
A division bench of the ITAT Kolkata comprising N.V.Vasudevan, Judicial Member and Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member were ruled that the provisions of deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act would not applicable to Current Account Transactions.
The assessee failed to demonstrate as to what services have been rendered by her husband or the daughter to whom salaries have been paid. Therefore, the salary claimed by the assessee towards husband and daughter deserves to be disallowed.
