Sponsored
    Follow Us:

All ITAT

Depreciation should be allowed as claimed in revised return and not as claimed in original return

October 29, 2012 3577 Views 0 comment Print

CIT(A) followed the earlier order of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case in part and not in toto. He was of the view that interest and salary to the partners be allowed but not interest to third parties and the depreciation was to be allowed as claimed in the original return because the claim made in the revised return could not be substantiated. However, he has brought nothing on record as to how and in what manner the claim in the revised return was not substantiated particularly when the then learned CIT(A) vide order dt. 30th March, 2007 accepted the filing of revised return and the said order on the issue of acceptance of revised return

Deduction u/s. 80-IB(10) cannot be denied for unauthorised excess construction

October 28, 2012 2163 Views 0 comment Print

As for the excess area constructed, as rightly held by the learned CIT(A), it is for the BBMP to look into the violations if any in the construction of the housing project. That however does not authorize the Assessing Officer to hold that the assessee has not got approval for the housing project OR that the conditions laid down in section 80IB (10) stated violated.

Penalty cannot be levied for mere rejection of debatable claim

October 28, 2012 2348 Views 0 comment Print

What is to be seen in the instant case, is whether the claim for deduction of depreciation u/s 32 of the Act, made by the assessee was bona-fide and whether all the material facts relevant thereto have been furnished and once it is so established, the assessee cannot be held liable for concealment penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act.

Penalty not justified for disallowance of Bona fide claim

October 28, 2012 1414 Views 0 comment Print

As explained by assessee, the income could not be offered as assessee sought approval under section 10(23G) as early as of 24-8-2005 which was followed with reminder letter addressed to the CCIT on 17-1-2006. Since the application was made in form No. 56E, it is natural that the Board will either accept or reject the application in a reasonable period of time. As on 1-11-2006 assessee has not been communicated by the result of the application, even though it was following it up.

Simply paying share application money not entitle any applicant of shares to allotment of shares

October 28, 2012 1136 Views 0 comment Print

In the light of the above discussions, the admitted facts of the case under consideration are that during the year under consideration share holding of the company has changed by more than 51% and management and control of the company has been passed on to Pippal family.

No penalty levied on Akhilesh yadav for violation of Sec. 269SS, as reasonable cause was exist

October 28, 2012 5927 Views 0 comment Print

In the instant case, the AO did not dispute the genuineness of the transaction entered into between the assessee and Samajwadi Party and no addition had been made in this regard. Instead of cash, if the assessee had taken loan through cheque, it would have taken some time for process in clearing. Since the amount was deposited and withdrawn from bank on the same day for making cash payment to the Nazul Authority, there could be no reason to doubt the bona fide of the assessee.

Where liaison office of assessee merely co-ordinated its purchases in India, it could not be regarded as assessee’s PE in India

October 28, 2012 567 Views 0 comment Print

Section 9 does not seek to bring into the tax net the profits of a non-resident which cannot reasonably be attributed to operations carried out in India. Even if there be a business connection in India, the whole of the profit accruing or arising from the business connection is not deemed to accrue or arise in India. It is only that portion of the profit which can reasonably be attributed to the operations of the business carried out in India, which is liable to income-tax.

Error in e-filling of Income tax Return can be rectified u/s. 154 application

October 28, 2012 4554 Views 1 comment Print

In the present system of e-filing of return which is totally depended upon the usage of software, It is possible that some clerical errors may occur at the time of entering the data in the electronic form. The return is prepared electronically which is converted into an XML file either through the free down loaded software provided by the CBDT or by the softwares available in the market.

Trust imparting education irrespective of caste, creed & religion entitled to registration u/s 12AA

October 26, 2012 2315 Views 0 comment Print

DIT (E) was not justified in forming an opinion that the objects of the assessee are for a specific community being violative of the provisions of s. 13(1)(b) of the Act. As a matter of fact, the assessee has been serving the public irrespective of caste, creed and religion by imparting education and, thus, it is entitled to registration u/s 12AA of the Act.

Loan advisory fees taxable in year of receipt itself & not over loan term, if not refundable in any case

October 26, 2012 741 Views 0 comment Print

Assessee stated before the A.O. that this advisory fee related to the loan granted and pertaining to setting covenants, negotiations and execution of documentation, creation of security etc. It shows that the amount from each party was one time receipt related with the rendering of such services for the purposes of sanction of loan.

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