Assessee cannot be penalized merely on the ground that the six companies as discussed above failed to reply to the notices issued to them under section 133(6) of the Act.
Shri Neeraj Goel Vs. ACIT (ITAT Delhi) Addition on account of alleged interest income is not sustainable in the eyes of law, because the document does not mention the name of the assessee, does not bear the signature of the assesee, not in the handwriting of the assessee, documents has imply jottings of certain figures […]
It cannot be said that there was no escapement of income merely because tax was deducted at source on such income. When it is open under Explanation 3 to section 147 of the Act for the AO to reassess the income on any issue which newly comes to his notice subsequent to the issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act, it cannot be said that mere wrong mentioning of the provision of law relating to the other issues in the reasons recorded would vitiate the proceedings.
Adarsh Coopertaive Urban Bank Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Hyderabad) ATM is a computer telecommunication device that allows Bank Customers to access banking at places other than the normal bank without having to take the trouble to go to the Bank in person and collect the cash as is done under the conventional method of withdrawing […]
Inadequate inquiry by AO with respect to compliance of TDS under section 194H could not be equated with lack of inquiry, so as take the case for revision under section 263.
Because in any view, the addition made u/s 68 of Rs.10,00,000/- of amount of gifts received (Rs.5,00,000/-+ Rs.5,00,000/-) in the Assessment u/s 153A without having any adverse material, and by not appreciating the evidences on record, the addition confirmed by ld. CIT(A) is grossly unjust, arbitrary, and against the facts and law of the case.
CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition wrongly made under section 153A of the Act, without there being any adverse material on record against the assessee; that since the assessee had no business income, no books of account were maintained and the addition was made only on the basis of the assessee’s pass book, which is not a book of account; that as such, the addition made under section 68 of the Act is not sustainable.
Jhabua Power Limited Vs DCIT (ITAT Kolkata) It is observed that the construction of Power Plant of the assessee-company was under progress during the year under consideration and in connection with the same, security deposit was required to be kept by the assessee to Commercial Tax Officer for sales-tax registration as well as with Executive […]
The CIT (A) has failed to understand that your appellant was not under any legal obligation to effect TDS on purchase of Computer Software in F.Y. 2011-12 as these were considered as purchase of goods under the then existing provisions of law and subjected to customs duty. Purchase of computer software was brought under the definition of Royalty vide the Finance Act 2012 with retrospective effect.
The assessee, a company engaged in deriving rental income from letting out of warehouse, filed its return of income for asst. year 201314 on 29/8/2013 declaring income of Rs. 26,97,860/- treating the rental income received there form as business receipts and offering the same for taxation of business income. The case was taken up for scrutiny and the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) vide order dated 24/3/2016
