Held that assessee failed to explain identity and creditworthiness of the creditors and genuineness of the transaction. Accordingly, addition u/s 68 sustained.
Held that we are inclined to allow the Cenvat Credit of input services for construction of immovable property, which is further let out to various customers.
Held that the source of withdrawal of the money is being clearly demonstrated and their deposit of money on various occasions is also established by the assessee through her bank account. Accordingly, addition u/s. 69A towards deposit of demonetized currency notes unsustainable.
AGM Properties P. Ltd Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) To recapitulate the facts, it is an admitted position that for AY 2013-14 the assessee had originally filed its return of income under section 139(1) of the Act on 15.11.2014 and assessment under section 143(1) of the Act was completed on 15.11.2013. The time limit for issuance […]
Natarajan Purushothaman Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai) During appellate proceedings, the assessee submitted that he used to bring cash during visits to India and it was customary to provide some cash to the parents during such visit. The Ld. CIT(A), inter-alia, observed that the deposits of Rs.3.45 Lacs was stated to funded out of earlier withdrawals […]
Ravindra Joma Bhagat Vs ITO (ITAT Pune) ITAT noted that the delay of 2172 days are abnormal and the assessee could not explain reasons which really prevented the assessee in filing appeal in time before the ITAT except stating that due to advice of his Chartered Accountant/Consultant, in our opinion is not reasonable cause which […]
Rajkumar Tiwari Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad) As regards the merit of the issue involved in this case relating to the addition of Rs.6,54,300/- made by the Assessing Officer under Section 69C of the Act by treating the cash payments made by the assessee against credit card purchases as unexplained expenditure, the learned Counsel for the […]
Vijay Vasantrao Mahadik Vs Addl. CIT (ITAT Pune) The assessee appears to have opened the foregoing bank account in the name of his erstwhile minor son Mr. Virendra Mahadik long back. He had also furnished his PAN number at the time of his minor son’s bank account opening. Mr. Jasnani vehemently argued that the learned […]
Paradeep Paribahan (P) Ltd Vs ACIT (ITAT Cuttack) The Assessing Officer in the course of original assessment proceedings has made additions only in respect of TCS on the sale of minerals and the addition on account of non-deduction of TDS in respect of interest on borrowed capital paid by the assessee to NBFC. Admittedly, the […]
Sidiqbhai Usmanbhai Kaliwala Vs DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad) It is seen from record, the assessee paid interest free loan of Rs. 21,67,952/- to M/s. S.S. Enterprise, out of the interest free funds available with the assessee, who has made a profit of Rs. 31,04,682/- during the assessment year 2015-16. It is not the case of the […]
