Bappanalli Brothers Vs ACIT (ITAT Banglore) CIT(A) concluded that the payments were not made directly to the cultivator and therefore the Assessee has not proved existence of circumstances set out in Rule 6DD(e) of the rules. ITAT held that The reasons given by the CIT(A) for treating the payment in question not to the Agriculturists […]
Impugned Section 271(1)(c) Penalty proceedings imposed by AO is not maintainable against assessee’s legal heir under section 159 of Act
ACIT Vs Pradip Mullick (ITAT Kolkata) Assessee submitted that owing to business of manufacturing and sale of sweets and confectioneries, he has to regularly purchase different types of raw materials from different vendors for his day to day business requirement. The number of vendors are large as there are small vendors mostly supplying perishable item […]
ITAT held that even if you invoke provisions of Sec.47A(3) of the Act, to withdraw exemption granted u/s.47(xiv)(b) of the Act, but, in principle there cannot be any capital gains on transfer of goodwill, because, said goodwill is not self-generated or created on account of conversion of proprietary concern into a Pvt. Ltd. Co., but acquired by incurring cost.
No distinction between compensation for compulsory acquisition of agricultural & non agricultural land for income Tax exemption under RFCTLARR Act
ITAT held that the assessee has not wilfully delayed the filing of appeal and we find that there is no negligence on the part of the assessee, as the assessee has filed appeal manually in time.
Assessee was not having any permanent establishment in India and was providing the service only from Singapore and therefore the provisions of Section 195 of the Act are not applicable.
Regular books of accounts maintained by assessee in tally software, now being referred by Revenue, to justify impugned addition did not constitute incriminating material unearthed during search.
Contribution received from the members towards infrastructure facilities should be treated as a capital receipt as these contributions were received for a specific purpose.
Brijesh Sharma Vs DCIT (ITAT Jaipur) During the Assessment assessee submitted to the AO vide letter dated 12.11.2014 that the assessee had purchased a plot of land situated in Jaipur for disclosed consideration of Rs. 5,21,000/- which was paid by cheque. The AO issued summon u/s 131(2) the seller, Smt. Choti Devi. In her statement […]
