M.P. Police Sakh Sahkari Sanstha Maryadit Vs PCIT (ITAT Indore) Co-operative societies engaged in banking business are eligible for deduction u/s. 80P on their interest income from bank deposits- ITAT Indore Facts of the Case 1. The assessee is a co-operative society engaged in the business of banking which filed ITR claiming deduction u/s 80P. […]
ITAT Mumbai held that in absence of rights in the domain name, receipt from domain name registration doesn’t fall in the category of royalty as defined under Article 12(3) of India-UAE DTAA.
ITAT Mumbai held that addition with regard to unexplained payment unsustainable in the hands of the employee as employee merely handled the cash on behalf of the employer.
Assessee not liable for penalty under Section 271(1 )(c) when an addition is being made with the help of deeming provision of Section 50C
Any action on part of the Assessing officer to verify utilization of amount deposited in capital gains account scheme needs to be undertaken or examined in the year when the period of three years from the date of transfer of original asset expires and not in year of transfer of original asset.
Section 200A deals with processing of TDS statement & Clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 200A was inserted w.e.f. 01-06-2015 providing for levy of fee u/s. 234E
ITAT held that Investment referred in Section 142A pertains to Investment made by assessee in construction of property and not investment made in purchase of ready built house property.
Falgun N. Sheth Vs ITO (ITAT Rajkot) The plain reading of the provision of law as provided in section 206C(1A) of the Act would bring out there is no time line prescribed for filing of such declaration. Nothing to this effect has been brought to our notice by the ld. DR; nor is it his […]
Assessee demonstrated that cash deposit in its bank account by a party in the state of Assam is against its sales realisation and is duly accounted in its books of account and offered for taxation.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that adoption of one of the courses permissible in law which resulted in to loss of revenue cannot be treated as erroneous order and accordingly invocation of revision proceedings u/s 263 unjustifiable.
