Sponsored
    Follow Us:

All ITAT

Gifting of property will entitle assessee to claim exemption u/s 54 if left with only one

January 21, 2016 2548 Views 0 comment Print

ITAT Delhi held in case of ITO v Shri Sameer Jasuja the property has been gifted by the person to his wife, then Assessee will entitled to the exemption u/s 54F if he is left with one property. It further held that section 64(1)(iv) will not operate to nullify gift and would operate only to club income in the hands of donor assessee.

Section 68 cannot be applied where Assessee discharges onus to prove receipt of share capital along with premium

January 21, 2016 1729 Views 0 comment Print

DCIT Vs M/s Ansh Intermediate Services Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Lucknow) The addition cannot be sustained only for the simple reason that these shareholder companies have not responded in first round of commission.

Rates as per DTAA includes all surcharges, addition on account of education cess not sustainable

January 21, 2016 20348 Views 0 comment Print

ITAT Delhi held In the case of OSRAM India Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT that Article 2(1) of the India Singapore tax treaty provides that the taxes covered shall include tax and surcharge thereon. Once it is concluded that education cess is nothing but an additional surcharge

Warehouse leasing Income of Company incorporated with such object is to be taxed as business income

January 21, 2016 2023 Views 0 comment Print

ITAT Delhi held In the case of DCIT vs. D.R.S. Warehousing (North) Pvt. Ltd. that the company was incorporated to provide material handling, storage, transportation, distribution, movers, packing and warehousing facilities which form part of its business.

Bogus Purchases: Addition solely based on sales-tax dept. info not sustainable

January 20, 2016 7676 Views 0 comment Print

ITAT Mumbai held in the case of Hiralal Chunilal Jain vs. ITO that addition for alleged Bogus Purchase not sustainable as AO had made the addition solely on the basis of information received from the Sales tax department without making any independent inquiry or following the principles of natural justice before making the addition.

Department must not take advantage of ignorance of the assessee about his rights

January 19, 2016 15874 Views 0 comment Print

Hon’ble Kolkata ITAT has in its judgement of Madhabi Nag v/s ACIT has placed reliance on The CBDT Circular No.14 of 1955 dated 11.04.1955 and has taken a view that the officers of the department must not take advantage of ignorance of the assessee about his rights

Flats to be constructed by vendee on behalf of co–owners does not constitute non–monetary consideration

January 19, 2016 715 Views 0 comment Print

CIT Vs Late Gopal V. Gorwani (ITAT Mumbai) The Assessing Officer, on perusing the aforesaid terms of the agreement was of the view that flats to be constructed by the vendee on behalf of the co–owners is the non–monetary consideration received by them on account of sale of the property.

Addition u/s 68 cannot be made solely on the ground of non-production of payer’s bank statement

January 19, 2016 1367 Views 0 comment Print

The ITAT Delhi in the case of Shri Ashutosh Garg vs. ACIT held that when the assessee had produced his copy of bank accounts showing the advancing of loan to non-resident and its repayment collection along with affidavit filed both by non-resident and assessee

Rule 46A – No contravention, as Arbitral Award not in nature of document/evidence, may be considered in any stage of proceedings

January 17, 2016 850 Views 0 comment Print

ITAT Chandigarh held In the case of M/s HMM Coaches Ltd. vs. ACIT that according to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the Arbitral Award is like a decree of the Court and is executable by the Courts. It is, therefore, like an order/judgement enforceable at law and as such, could not be construed as document or evidence.

Section 263 – Revision valid where AO has not made any enquiry about quantification of losses claimed

January 17, 2016 1475 Views 0 comment Print

ITAT Delhi held In the case of G. E. Money Financial Services Ltd. vs. DCIT that where AO has not verified either (a) the allowability of the loss in principle or (b) where the claim is factually correct as quantification of the loss has not been verified by the AO, in both cases exercise of powers u/s 263 is in accordance with law.

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
August 2024
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031