ITAT Hyderabad held that as the parties have entered into registered Joint Development Agreement (JDA) on 04.04.2007 and the “Group of assessee” have also handed over possession to the TBPD pursuant to the agreement. Hence, transfer took place in the assessment year 2008-09.
ITAT Hyderabad held that transfer of assets of the partnership to the retiring partners would amount to the transfer of the capital assets in the nature of capital gains and business profits which is chargeable to tax under section 45(4) of the Income Tax Act.
Recent Mumbai Tribunal ruling reaffirms the legitimacy of fair market valuation in Angel Tax cases. Detailed analysis of PNP Maritime Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT case.
ITAT Indore held that addition u/s. 68 on account of bogus long term capital gains unsustainable as the alleged transaction is not found recorded in the books of accounts including the Dmat account of the assessee. Hence, addition on the basis of assumption unsustainable.
ITAT Jaipur held that requirement of TDS deduction u/s. 194C of the Income Tax Act on payments made to Eco Development Committee remanded back to AO with a direction to relook on various aspects.
ITAT Mumbai held that receipt of Rs 37 crores of exempt capital gain in a non-descript listed company operated by the accommodation entry provider, who has confessed that he has provided accommodations entries to the beneficiaries, including assessee remanded back to the file of AO for further enquiry.
ITAT Delhi held that without pointing out any specific defect in the audited books of accounts, AO cannot and should not make any estimated addition. Accordingly, such estimated addition deleted.
Explore the Ravinder Kumar vs ITO case at ITAT Delhi. Learn how the tribunal allowed capital gain deduction under section 54B for agricultural land purchased in the name of the spouse.
ITAT has deleted the entire addition and disallowance based for imposition of penalty, the penalty imposed so cannot continue and therefore, deserves to be deleted in full with reference to aforesaid the addition & disallowance.
ITAT Chennai held that disallowance of interest u/s 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act on loans and advances given to subsidiary company unjustified as investment in subsidiary is purely for commercial expediency.
