ITAT held that by acquiring business rights along with tangible assets, the assessee got an up and running business and the specified intangible assets acquired under slump sale agreement are in the nature of any other business or commercial rights of a similar nature on which depreciation is allowable.
ITAT held that so far as cash receipt of by assessee from his father’s proprietary firm is concerned, the provisions of section 269SS do not stand attracted.
ITAT Held that discount on issue of ESOP is allowable as deduction under the head Profits & Gains of Business or Profession.
Mere typographical error of the account number of the bank account does not mean that the assessee has not disclosed proper information about the bank account details. Addition u/s 69A unsustainable
As per mercantile system of accounting, provision for expenses is an ascertained liability and the same is eligible for deduction while computing total income.
Held that assessee had failed to satisfy the conditions precedent to claim as revenue expenditure, as the expenditure was incurred during the previous year relevant to the assessment year under consideration. Therefore, the claim cannot be allowed as deduction
Dhaval R Ajmera Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) Though the assessee has raised several grounds, the only effective issue involved in the impugned appeal is as to whether the ld. CIT(A) was justified in confirming the disallowance of Rs.7,89,745/- on account of alleged purchase of shares through M/s. Alliance Intermediates and Network Private Limited and alleged […]
Investment made by the assessee in another company is on capital account and further, when loss incurred on account of diminishing in value of said investment is capital in nature and thus, same cannot be claimed as deduction u/s.37(1) of the Act.
Twinkle Enviro Tech Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) At the outset, we find that assessee’s case has been referred to Hon’ble National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) for Insolvency Resolution Process and an Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) has been appointed in the assessee company. In view of the order passed by the Hon’ble NCLT, we […]
If guideline value of the property as on date of agreement of sale is considered, then there is no difference between consideration paid by the assessee for purpose of purchase of property and value assessed by stamp duty valuation authority and thus, provisions of section 56(2)(vii) of the Act, cannot be invoked.
