Assessee hospital was not entitled for registration under section 12A as it was charging on the basis of commercial rates from the patients and it had failed to demonstrate that the charges / fee charged by it were on a reasonable markup on the cost.
ITAT Delhi held that the amount received by the assessee from freight/logistic support services cannot be treated as FTS/FIS either under section 9(1)(vii) of the Income Tax Act or under tax treaty provisions and hence the same is not taxable in India.
ACIT Vs Gurgaon Gramin Bank (ITAT Delhi) It is emerges from the material on record that, the assessee was maintaining books of accounts which being duly audited by expert, i.e. Chartered Accountant. The report of the chartered accountant has been furnished before the A.O. At the time of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer has disallowed […]
DCIT Vs K. Dhandapani and Co. Ltd. (ITAT Chennai) ITAT Chennai held that assessee rightly proved that the land sold is agricultural land and agricultural activity was carried out on the same. Hence, the agricultural land is not assessable to capital gains. Facts- The only issue in this appeal of Revenue is as regards to […]
ITAT Bangalore held that HUF was disrupted / partitioned as on the date of assessment order and hence the assessment order in the status of HUF is invalid.
ITAT Bangalore held that the deposit of gold jewellery by family members of a partner in the partnership firm would be treated as the stock in trade of the firm as agreement between the firm and the partners provides that the jewellery given by the partner can be used by the firm and sold by the firm.
ITAT Mumbai held that Honble jurisdictional High Court order in case of CIT v Gem & Jewellery Export Promotion Council has held that none of the conditions attached to the grant affected the voluntary nature of the contribution and accordingly they would be exempt under section 12 of the Act and it is settled law that decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court is binding upon subordinate Tribunal and courts.
ITAT Bangalore held that order passed under section 263 of the Income Tax Act is invalid as the same does not have any Document Identification Number.
ITAT Mumbai held that depreciation cannot be disallowed as application of income under section 11(6) of the Income Tax Act when the assessee has not claimed purchase of asset as application of income in any of the previous years.
Neeraj Kumar Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) From the penalty order, we observe that the Assessing Officer nowhere stated that the notices issued u/s 142(1) of the Act were served on the assessee. In the entire penalty order we observe that the notices said to have been issued by the AO but it is not the […]
