Explore the ITAT Indore’s order on unexplained investment and undisclosed expenditure. Assess the impact of legal nuances on tax implications.
Murlidhar Hassani Vs DCIT (ITAT Jaipur) In the instant case, admittedly and undisputedly, the employees’ contribution to ESI and PF collected by the assessee from its employees have been deposited well before the due date of filing of return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act. Further, the ld D/R has referred to the explanation […]
To the extent of the interest earned from investments made by it with any co-operative society, a co-operative society is entitled to deduction of the whole of such income under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act. However, interest earned from investments made in any bank, not being a co-operative society, is not deductible under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act.
Vanderlande Industries Private Limited Vs ACIT (ITAT Pune) A cursory glance at the definition of the term `Royalties’ makes it patent that the hitherto content of para 4 of Article 12 comprising of copyright royalty cases only became subject matter of sub-para (a) of the amended para 4 of Article 12. In addition, para 4(b) […]
Kontoor Brands Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Bangalore) The issue on merit is regarding allowability of depreciation on intangible assets. On this aspect, the issue is covered by the Tribunal order rendered in the case of DCIT Vs. V.F. Arvind Brands Pvt. Ltd. (supra). Para nos. 12 of this Tribunal order are relevant in this […]
ITO Vs Cozy Footwear Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Delhi) Here in this case, the assessee company has received share application money from three parties. Two of them were Directors and one was a corporate entity M/s Omexpo Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. In so far as the share application money received from Directors, the AO has held the […]
ITAT Pune rules in favor of Ankit Enterprises, citing the treatment of unsold flats as stock-in-trade. Deemed rent addition not applicable.
Prodyut Kumar Ghos Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata) ITAT noted that assessee in his R.O.I (return of income) erroneously reflected the sale consideration that he received to the tune of Rs.26,96,250/- as agricultural income. On being confronted by the AO and when asked by the AO to produce evidence of agricultural income, the assessee realized the […]
Akbar Mohammad Vs ACIT (ITAT Jodhpur) In the present cases, it is not in dispute that the assessee deposited the contribution of PF & ESI belatedly in terms of section 36(1)(va) of the Act. However, the said deposits were made prior to filing of return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act. Of course, it […]
Smt. Lata Garg Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) Facts- The assessee is an individual and derived income from salary, income from house property, income from business or profession and income from other sources. It was alleged that there were certain bogus purchases. Accordingly, AO alleged adding the same to the total income of the assessee. Conclusion- […]
