Maheshwari Woods Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Bangalore) Amended provisions of section 43B as well as 36(1)(va) of the I.T.Act are not applicable for the assessment years under consideration as these are applicable from assessment year 2021-2022. By following the binding decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Essae Teraoka Pvt. […]
In the instant case, there is no relation whatsoever between the interest expenditure from a mortgaged loan and the payment received for rendering certain services. Advancing interest free loans to the employer company cannot be a ground for claiming deduction of interest expenditure from the salary income received from it.
Hapur Pilkhuwa Development Authority Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) Learned CIT(A) has not allowed the benefit of excess utilization of earlier years, claimed by the assessee by raising additional ground. Ld. AR for the assessee contended that this issue is also covered in favour of the assessee by the order passed by coordinate Bench of Tribunal […]
No reason is assigned for not following Rule of Consistency. The Revenue is under legal obligation to be consistent in its approach regarding taxability of any item. It cannot be purely on the whims and fancies of the Assessing Officer.
ACIT Vs Vinay Girish Bajpai (ITAT Mumbai) Assessee claimed that he has complied with all the requirements of claiming exemption/deduction under section 54 of the IT Act. He submitted that assessee has made the payment to the builder within the stipulated time. There was some issue of obtaining the completion certificate by the builder. Hence, […]
During the year under consideration also the assessee could not substantiate with relevant evidences that these expenses were related to loan syndication fees and the same was claimed as Investment Advisory Services without any break up of the detail of loan advances arranged by these two parties.
Centum Electronics Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Bangalore) Hon’ble Supreme Court, while deciding the identical issue in the case of Maruti Suzuki India Ltd held that assessment order passed on a nonexistent entity is without jurisdiction and deserves to be set aside. Fact of the case before the Hon’ble Supreme Court clearly shows that the notice […]
Sameer Granites Pvt.Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Bangalore) In the instant case, the assessee had submitted that the orders passed u/s 200A of the Act were never served on the assessee physically or otherwise. It was stated that intimation u/s 200A downloaded from the office of the Assessing Officer by the Tax Professional, was not communicated […]
In this case, assessee is engaged in manufacturing of automobile components and let out 50% of its factory building on lease and earned rental income. Thus, the ld. CIT(A) has rightly held the rental income as income under the head house property. Having the rental income held as income under the head house property, the assessee is not eligible for claim of depreciation on the let out portion.
Krishna Prasad Mikkilineni Vs DCIT (ITAT Bangalore) In the instant case also we have noticed that the assessee has given only permissive possession and not legal possession. Accordingly, following the above said decision of the coordinate bench, we hold that the transfer has not taken place during the year under consideration. Accordingly, capital gain is […]
