Last Hour Ministry Vs CIT (Exemptions) (ITAT Cochin) A perusal of the order cancelling registration wherein various reasons have been given as mentioned earlier apparently show that these reasons would at best give rise to violations u/s.13(1)(c) and 13(1)(d) of the Act which would result in additions in the assessment and reassessment. Such violations, if […]
DCIT Vs Voestalpine VAE VKN India Pvt. Ltd (ITAT Delhi) The assessee company has claimed an expenditure of Rs.2,41,98,983/- on account R & D Expenditure under the head of manufacturing expenditure. We have perused the details which have been enclosed at page no. 80 of the paper book. The same was also before the revenue […]
ITAT Mumbai remits the case to AO, grants Antonio Munroe another opportunity to substantiate challenges against Assessment and denied credits. Appeal allowed for statistical purposes.
Euro Home Vs DCIT (ITAT Chennai) CIT(A) held that the provisions of Sec.44AD would not apply to commission income and the rental income received would be assessed under Income from House Property. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed against which the assessee is in further appeal before us. ITAT find that commission income would not come […]
Due to paucity of time, the urgency and considering various factors that go into finalizing the transaction, the assessee was forced to accept cash to go ahead with the execution of the sale deed. The above facts clearly stipulated a `reasonable cause’ as mandated u/s 273B of the I.T.Act for violation of the provisions of section 269SS of the I.T.Act.
Culver Max Entertainment Private Limited Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) – validity of assessment order passed in the name of a Non-existing entity.
ITAT held that advance pricing agreement APA is applicable only for specified time span not exceeding five consecutive previous years u/s.92CC(4) r.w. sub section (9A)
Devarajulu Natarajan Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai) Ld. CIT(A), noted that post demonetization, cash deposited in State Bank of Hyderabad was only Rs.2.50 Lacs and cash deposited in Canara bank was Rs.6 Lacs only. Accordingly, the addition was restricted to Rs.8.50 Lacs. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. The Ld. AR pleaded for […]
Kanhaiya Lal Lalwani Vs ITO (ITAT Jaipur) It is noted that the cost of acquisition of plot as per the assessee was Rs. 555/- purchased on 16-04-1999 and thereafter addition/ improvement of Rs.3,41,000/- was made. In my view, if these benefits were allowed to the assessee then in that eventuality the capital gain arose on […]
Podar Literacy & Education Trust Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) AO has disallowed the claim of depreciation as per the mandate of provisions of sec. 11(6) of the Act, which reads as under:- (6) In this section where any income is required to be applied or accumulated or set apart for application, then, for such purposes […]
