The Kolkata ITAT recently held that the circulars issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) is binding on the department and it cannot take a plea that such a circular is not valid or is against the provisions of law.
There is no dispute that the search was conducted in the previous year relevant to the assessment year under consideration therefore the provisions of Section 153C are not applicable for the assessment year under consideration however, the mention of this Section in the order is only a mistake which is covered under the provisions of Section 292BB of the Act.
The contract of guarantee does not give any rise to principal – agent relationship between the assessee and the bank and, therefore, the consideration received by the bank on account of guarantee commission cannot be reckoned as commission as contemplated under section 194H and accordingly, there was no requirement to deduct TDS on this payment.
Explore the ITAT Delhi’s decision on Anant Concrete Products Pvt. Ltd. vs ITO, highlighting jurisdictional issues in the reassessment process. Learn how the lack of proper jurisdiction impacts the validity of re-assessment.
While deleting an addition made in respect of undisclosed income, the Delhi bench of the ITAT held that the gift received by the assessee cannot be treated as non-genuine merely for the reason that the family members of the assessee had received bogus gifts during the same year.
Dy. CIT Vs. Fagioli India (P) Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai) In this case assessing officers main allegation is that two parties from whom appellant made purchases are involved in providing accommodation entries as per the list published by Maharashtra Sales Tax Department. On the other hand, assessee has furnished certain evidences in the form of purchase […]
Even if a subsidy is given to attract industrial investment or expansion, which is a otherwise a capital receipt under the pre- amendment era, shall be treated as income chargeable to tax, except where it has been taken into account for determining the actual cost of assets in terms of Explanation 10 to section 43(1) of the Act.
It was held that exemption under Section 54 only requires that the property should be of residential nature and the fact that the residential house consists of several independent units cannot be an impediment to grant relief under Section 54 even if such independent units were on different floors.
Sri Lal A. Khemani Vs. ITO (ITAT Hyderabad) There is no dispute that assessee had purchased shares through stock exchange as evidenced by the broker’s note and also sold through stock exchange by way of another broker’s note. Both of which contain the transaction details, time of transaction along with STT paid. There is no […]
When assessee himself had adopted value of land as per Stamp Duty Authority for computation of long-term capital gain, then he could not claim adoption of the value of land as estimated by DVO, as he filed return of income and paid taxes, also there was no scope of reduction.
