ITAT Ahmedabad held in Sohan Builders Vs ACIT that if the AO had assessed the income of the assessee at some higher percentage than what the assessee had already shown in the computation then it would not amount to the concealment of income,
ITAT Ahmedabad held in M/s Anand Food Dairy & products Vs ITO that the deduction u/s 80IB(11A) would be allowed from the initial assessment year i.e A.Y relevant to the previous year in which the business was commenced but not from the A.Y of the incorporation of this provision in the I.T Act i. e not from -01-04-2005.
Relying on judgment of jurisdictional High Court in the case of Raajratna Metal Industries Ltd. vs. ACIT, [2014] 49 taxmann.com 15 (Gujarat) ITAT Ahemdabad held in the case of DCIT vs. Naroda Enviro Project Ltd. that the reopening of assessment solely on the ground of audit objection is not valid.
The ITAT Ahmedabad in the case of M/s Ruchi Developers vs. ITO, where Assessee has failed to produce creditor parties in respect of alleged Bogus Purchases while he submitted all other details and evidences and additions been made,
In the case of M/s Kantilal Siyaram vs. ACIT (ITAT Ahmedabad), the assessee has claimed that advance tax was paid, which was not recorded in the original return on the income which was remained to be disclosed in original return.
ITAT Ahmedabad held in case of ITO vs. M/s Tirupati Enterprises held that the revenue has to be recognized only at the time when substantial risk and reward are transferred to the buyer by the seller. Since the construction was incomplete, the property was not ready for sale.
In the case of ACIT vs. Smarneev Fashions Pvt. Ltd, ITAT Ahmedabad held that merely because there is a fall in gross profit or there is a NIL closing stock at the end of the year the books of accounts cannot be rejected.
ITAT Jaipur held In the case of ITO vs. Tara Chand Jain that the right in land cannot be equated with the land or building. Therefore, it is concluded that section 50C is applicable to transfer of capital asset only in respect of land or building or both and is not applicable to right in land. In the present case
ITAT Chennai held In the case of M/s. M.R.M. Plantations P. Ltd. vs. DCIT that u/s 57 only expenditure incurred in connection with earning of income was allowable as deduction. The assessee admitted that the entire income is by way of interest from the bank deposits.
ITAT Held in ITO vs Tara Chand Jain that the amendment in sec 50C which inculcates word assessable would have prospective effect from the date of its insertion i.e from 01-10-2009 and would not have retrospective effect on the sale of property before 01-10-2009
