This article deal with the issue of Long Term Capital Gain on Sale of Small Company Shares or on Penny Stocks. Article is based on ITAT Kolkata order in the case of Surya Prakash Toshniwal VS. ITO in which it held that Long-term capital gains claimed exempt u/s 10(38) cannot be treated as bogus unexplained […]
Article is case study on allowability of expenses by Pharma Companies related to Doctors on on Customer Relationship Management expenses, Key Account Management expenses, Gift Articles, Free medicine Sample, Advertisement and Sales Promotion based on ITAT Mumbai Judgment in the case of The Dy. CIT Vs. PHL Pharma P Ltd.
ITAT Mumbai held that Where assessee is involved in arbitrage activities, the transactions of shares in cash segment and future segment cannot be segregated to calculate profit and loss from each segment separately.
AO’s assumption of jurisdiction under section 153A of Income Tax Act,1961 and consequent passing of order of assessment u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 153A is void if Assessing Officer erred in assuming jurisdiction u/s 153A
Notice as prescribed U/s. 143(2) was not properly served on assessee, ITAT Kolkata, held, that assessment made U/s. 144 of the Act was not valid & it was quashed.
Business of the assessee is carried on in the leased property and any expenditure is incurred on the construction of any structure by way of renovation, extension or improvement, then, section 32 will apply and accordingly, the assessee can claim depreciation on the value spent on such improvement or changes in the structure.
In view of these glaring facts, the assessment of Smt. Jaya Agrawal and the fact that the relevant purchases for AY 2004-05 have been held to be genuine, we see no infirmity in the order of ld. CIT(A) in deleting these additions. On the issues of Shri Chokshi, Mahasagar Securities Pvt. Ltd. and Goldstar Finvest Pvt. Ltd., a catena of judgments from ITAT, Mumbai and Ahmedabad is available in favour of the assessee which view also stands confirmed by Hon’ble Bombay High court in the case of Shri Mukesh Moralia.
M/s Padmini Products Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Bangalore) Assessee filed return of income declaring loss and thereafter, filed revised return enhancing the amount of loss declared in the original return. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and notice under section 143(2) was issued by AO. The assessee contended that the scrutiny […]
ITAT held that No addition can be made u/s 68 in respect of any loan received prior to start of previous year relevant to present assessment year.
Hon’ble Delhi ITAT held that Penalty can be imposed only on disproved claim of expenditure and not unproved claim of expenditure.
